The Sun.
London, England, 1861-05-10 00:00:00

PETITIONS.

Several petitions were presented in favour of the aboli •
tion of church rates ; against the Salmon Fisheries (Scot-
land) Bill ; in favour of an alteration in regard to Roman
Catholic paupers in workhouses, so as to afford them in-
creased facilities for the free exercise of their religious
duty, and for the education of their children ; from inhabi-
tants of Western Australia, praying that transportation to
that colony might not be discontinued ; from inhabitants
of Norwich against the pressure of the poor rates under the
present Poor Law Removal Act ; in favour of the abolition
of the Annuity Tax, &c.
THE GALN#AY CONTRACT.
Mr. BAXTER asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
when the papers moved for with respect to the Galway Con-
tract will be laid upon the table of the house : if it was true,
1. That even now, after all the extensions of time granted,
the Atlantic Royal Mail Company had only one new ship at
sea—the Columbia. 2. That that vessel took ten days to
steam from Galway to St. John's, Newfoundland, on her
first voyage, and afterwards was compelled to put into Hali-
fax for want of coals. 3. That another new vessel, the
Hibernia, had been condemned at Liverpool as un-
seaworthy. 4. That the Government had allowed
the company to employ on the North Atlantic
the ;Parana, en old ship which has been for some
time considered unsuitable for the West India service. 5.
That it appears from the published accounts that the At-
lantic Royal Mail Company had lost three-fourths of its
capital. 6. That, under these circumstances, Government
did not intend to ask the House of Commons for the vote of
£78,000 which appeared in the estimates.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that he should be very happy to give all the infor-
mation it was in his power to supply. With regard
to the first question he had only to say that the com-
pany had enly one new ship at sea, namely, the Columbia,
but they have employed others with a view to carry out
their contract. With respect to the second question, there
was no official information on the part of Government,
but it had been stated that the vessel in question
after leaving Galway did put into Halifax on her first
voyage for want of coals. The statement had been con-
firmed at Lloyds, so that he must answer the question in
the affirmative. The Hibernia had suffered damage on its
voyage from Southampton to Galway, and it had been an-
nounced at the Admiralty. With reference to the next
question he had to state that the Government had not
allowed the employment of the Parana. He could give
no answer to the other question. The right hon. gentle-
man subsequently stated that since answering these
questions he had received a report from the company in
question which he had not been able to read, and which
would be laid before the house.
PRIVATEERS.

Mr. IV. FORSTER asked the Secretary of State for the
Horne Depa►tmeat, whether it was not a criminal offence
against the provisions of the Foreign Enlistment Act for any
subject of her Majesty to serve on board any privateer
licensqd by the person assuming, as President of the
_ _

Southern confederacy, to exercise power over a part of the
United States, or for any person within her Majesty's domi-
nions to assist in the equipment of such privateer ; and, if
so, whether he will take measures to prevent the infringe-
ment of the law, either by her Majesty's subjects or by any
agents of the President of the Southern confederacy who
are now in England, and also 'whether any such pri-
vateer, equipped in a part of her Majesty's dominions will
not be liable to forfeiture.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said the principle of our law was that
the subjects of her Majesty should not enter into the ser-
vice of any State at war with a State with which we were at
peace. Her Majesty's Government had considered the
case, and would adopt the steps necessary when any case
arose that would require their interposition. '
ALLOWANCES TO WITNESSES.
Mr. W. EGERTON asked the Secretary of State for the
Home Department whether he intended to bring in a bill,
during the present session, to alter the scale of allowances
to witnesses at the assizes and sessions.

Sir G. C. LEWIS said he had already stated he would
bring in a bill to amend the law on the subject.

GOVERNMENT LOANS.

Mr. R. LONG asked the First Lord of the Treasury
what proportion of the Fortifications loan the Government
proposed to borrow during the ensuing financial year.
Lord PALMERSTON said it was impossible to answer
the question at present, but if there were any alterations to
be made in the present estimates it would of necessity be
communicated to the house.
PRINCESS ALICE'S ANNUITY BILL.
This bill went through committee.
THE DISTURBANCES IN AMERICA.

On the motion for going into committee of supply on
ways and means,

Mr. BENTINCK asked the First Lord of the Treasury
whether, in consequence of what was taking place in Ame-
rica, any increase in naval and military expeaditure of this
country would be rendered necessary, and whether, incon-
sequence of the probable deficiency in the cotton supply,
the customs and duties would not be injuriously affected ?
Mr. CRAWFORD said ho believed the panic relative
to cotton originated merely in the rumours of the e•Aton
market.

Mr. DISRA.E LI said that it was not intended at his side
of the house to offer any opposition to passing the resolu-
tions proposed to the house on the 7th of this month, pro.
vided an early day was found for intrody.cing the bill
founded on these financial resolutions.
The CHANCELLOR, of the EXCNEQUER said that
he proposed to bring in this bill on Monday next.

Lord PALMERSTON said he did not consider that the
events which unfortunately were taking place in America
would necessitate any increase in the naval and military
establishments of this country. He did not think that any
diminution in the customs and excise duties by the events
alluded to would occur.

WAYS AND MEANS.
The resolutions in committee of ways and means.were
reported and agreed to.

THE PAPER DUTY;
On the motion for going int., committee of Ways and
Means,

Sir J. NORTIICOTE strongly condemned the policy of
the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his proposed abolition
of the paper duty, which he contended was not justified by
the demands of the country or the state of the national
finances.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER defended
the proposed abolition on the same grounds which he had
already urged in support of this measure. He contended
that the opposition to the proposea aeouLcuu. Wes,, Loovd
an entire misapprehension of the question.
Mr. DISRAELI supported the views of Sir S. Northcote,
and complained that the explanations afforded by the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer were unsatisfactory
Mr. MAGUIRE asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer
whether, before proceeding to further legislation in respect
to the customs duty on foreign paper, he would consent to
the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the
operation and effect of the arztem of export duties on
foreign rags upon the paper-making trade of Great Britain
and Ireland ?

After a few words from Mr. NORRIS,
Mr. NEWDEGATE opposed the remissionofinthis duty,
regard
Which, however beneficial it might prove _
spinner, would to the interest of the cot ton
be merely infinitesimal as
regarded the . trade,
silk
which was now so much depressed. For instance, Dix es
I )iec
of
ribbon, of 36 yards 3 inches, would cost £8 25., and the
cost of the paper for packing it was only threepence. He
entered into different details in. support of his views. He
dissented from the statements of the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer entirely in regard to the operation of the abolition
of this duty, which would utterly fail in realising the ad-
vantages
SON said avantageswhich the right laon gentleman predicted.
urgent appeal had been made
some time ago to the Government by
the mayor and some
of the inhabitants of Coventry to grant a special exemption
to tho people of Coventry from the paper duty.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said there had been as exemption
of the duty on card paper.
Mr. GIBSON—There bad Leen, ..ed that exemption
made the paper duty more unpopular. The principle of
exemptions had already been carried to a considerable ex-
tent, but it was now felt that the Government could not
well grant an exemption to one trade and refuse it to an-
other. There were at present some seven or eight statutory
exemptions, and about 18 exemptions by Treasury orders.
It would be much better, in his 'opinion, if the duty were
t) be retained, to extend it to all. Could there be any rea-
son for exempting books in Latin, Greek, Oriental, and
Northern languages, printed at Oxford, from the tax, while
ordinary school books were subject to it ? This exemption
was made "for the encouragement of learning," and per-
haps it was owing to that expression that the duty was
called a tax upon knowledge. If they were to keep the
Excise duty upon British paper, and at the same time allow
free trade in foreign paper, the supply of paper from foreign•
countries might increase, but the Excise duty
on English
paper might assume a stationary character. It behoved the
house well to consider whether they should keep the paper
311 au ufacturers of the country under the influence of Ezein

restrictions. Those restrictions operated injuriously, and
the sooner they were removed the better.
WAYS AND MEANS.

The SPEAKER then left the chair, and the house went
into Committee of Ways and Means.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
had been asked whether the Government would consent
to the appointment of a select committee to inquire into
the operation of the export daty on foreign rags. If it
was meant by that that the Government should not alter
the existing law until such a committee had made their
report, the Government certainly could not give its con-
sent. An hon. gentleman had proposed that the excise duty
should be abolished, but that a duty more than equal to
that should be retained. He thought it was not to be ex-
pected that the House of Commons would set up a new
protective duty which would, in effect, be a prohibitory duty.
The average value of paper was 6d. a lb. The hon. gentle-
man proposed to retain a duty of -16 s. a cwt. on an article
of 40s. in value. This would be constituting a new duty of
about 40 per cent. on foreign paper. He (Mr. Gladstone)
could not suppose that the. House of Commons would agree
to that. France was soon likely to conclude arrangements
which would open Belgian and German markets to herself
and England, and to remove existing restraints on the raw
material. He thought, under those circumstances, it would
be a very bad thing to set the example of a retrogressive
movement in our free trade policy by doubling the duty on
foreign paper. As to the French treaty, that was never made
as a concession to France. England, in negotiating that
treaty, was merely carrying out her own principles. He
hoped the house would not consent to the demand of the
hon. gentleman. (Rear, hear.)
Mr. MAGUIRE said the observation he made was not
ambiguous. The excise duty and the customs duty on
paper were very different. He would produce such reliable
facts as he hoped would induce the house to pause before
they remitted the duty on paper. He implored the right
hon. gentleman by every motive of patriotism and humanity
not to carry out this resolution with respect to the paper
duties in opposition to the views of a large portion of the
house. He (Mr Maguire) supported the budget of last year,
but then he was not aware that Mr. Cobden had committed
a great practical blunder with regard to the paper manu-
facturers of the country. What he wanted the right hon.
gentleman to do was, to delay this proposition, to stop legis-
lation on this point, to have a committee appointed and
witnesses examined in order to ascertain the effect of the
proposed change on those engaged in this department of
industry. He had ascertained that the home manufacturer
was not able to enter into competition with the foreigner.
The result of existing competition was such that two Dub-
lin manufacturers, one of whom sent six tons and another
nine tons of paper to London every week, representing a
trade of £47,000 a year, now did not send a single pound.
The Manchester Guardian now consumed one two-hun-
dredth part of all the paper manufactured in the kingdom.
The result would be that, as regarded the manufacture of
paper for that journal alone, no less than 80 hands would
be thrown out of employment in this country. But the
supply of foreign paper did not apply to English news-
papers alone ; it extended to the colonies, for the paper for
the Melbourne Argus was supplied by the Belgium manu-
facturers. The effect of this proposal of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer would throw at least 20 paper mills in this
country out of employment, and thus cast a large number
of the working classes upon the poor rates of the country.
If they were to have free trade, let it be such a free trade as
would give equal advantages to both parties to the contract.
Let not the hands of one of the parties be tied, and his feet
manacled, while the other was free to crush and oppress his
opponent. What he asked for the... English and Irish paper
manufacturers was fair play. (Hear, hear.) If they gave
the foreigner the benefit of free trade in respect to the in-
troduction of piper into this country, let the British manu-
facturer be enabled to have foreign rags free of duty ; for
the duty on foreign rags ruled, in fact, the whole of the
paper market. Neither Belgium nor France allowed rags
to be imported into this country, and Gelanany laid on a
duty of £9 a ton upon rags exported from that country ;
so that the manufacturer here was deprived of the raw
material for the manufacture of paper. And thus, while
we allowed foreign paper to come in free of duty, the
foreigner put a protecting duty on our paper. Now, was
this fair or just towards the British manufacturers ? If
the foreigner was to have this advantage as regarded
paper, let us have an equivalent as regarded rags. (Hear,
hear.) What were the facts of the case as regarded the
introduction of foreign paper into this country ? Why,
that last year the importation of foreign paper was about
800,0001bs. or 1,000,000115., while for the seven months
and a half of the present financial year the quantity of
foreign paper entered here amounted to 5,000,0001b5., and it
was confidently expected that the increase in the quantity
of foreign paper into this country would be equal to a mil-
lion lbs. a month. But if it only amounted to 10,090,0001b5.,
the effect would be to deprive 1,000 persons of employment.
(Hear.) Was not this a matter deserving of serious conside-
ration by the house ? It was utterly impossible to allow such
a state of things to go on, by which the trade of the home
manufacturer of paper would be wholly destroyed. Such
then being the state of the case, he did not think he was
asking the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer tco
much when he requested him to pause before he tisok off the
custom duty on foreign paper.. He thought it was the duty
of the Government to represent it to the Emperor of the
French that there should be a real reciprocity in this mat-
ter, and that he should allow us to have rags free of duty
while we allowed foreign paper into this country without
imposing a duty upou it. It might be very true, or indeed
was the fact, that France did not compete with us in re-
spect to the article of paper. But under the terms of the
treaty made between this country and France, Belgium
was competing with us—(hear)—and he heard it was the
intention of some English paper manufacturers to go to Bel-
gium to establish paper mills there. They would net, how-
ever, take English workmen with them, but would employ
Belgian workmen, whom they could get at a lower rate of
wages, and the consequence would be that the ratepayers of
England would be required to supporethe poor people who
would thus be thrown out of employment by our policy in
carrying out free trade, which was only beneficial to the fo-
reigner. He had great admiration for the energy and Enter
prise of that hive of industry—Manchester, but suppose
the Americans were to say that England should not have
cotton except by paying a revenue to America in the sha2e
of duty, suppose they were to put a five p3r cent. export
duty on cotton to obtain a revenue, and to protect the ma-
nufacturers of the North, would there not soon be a tre-
-1 mendous clamour in that house ? He would venture to
say the sufferers would march to London 'to compel the
Legislature to take sums step in the matter, and they would
be unable to resist that clamorous and starving multitude.
He therefore said that he was not asking too much in call-
ing upon the right hon. gentleman to appoint a committee
to inquire into this subject, to hear a few witnesses, and
report the result to the house. By this means the house
would be put in possession of the facts, and it could then
legislate with the assurance that they fully understood the
whole merits of the question. (Hear.) He was exceedingly
anxious on the subject, especially as it seriously affected
Ireland, and as the interests of the only remaining manu-
facture in that country were affected by the policy proposed
to be pursued by the right hon. gentleman. He made this
appeal t,.) the right hon. gentleman on the ground of justice
and fairness, and with the view of enabling the house to
come to an opinion on the subject. He moved the:resolution
be not adopted, and that the Chairman report progress.
Mr. LIDDELL wished to remind the right hon. gentle-
man the Chancellor of the Exchequer that we had altered
the Navigation Laws, and yet we had no reciprocity on
the part of France in this particular. The same would be
the case as regarded the paper. It was really too much that
we should give away every advantage to the foreigner, and
get nothing in return.

Mr. BUXTON said that those who were in favour of the
appointment of the proposed committee repudiated any n0t;,,,,
t;,,,, of reet.etien for the paper makers. All that was re-
quired was that the English menutacturer .elicruis v.:.1.1...a
on the same footing as the foreigner, and what was asked
for by the appointment of a committee was to inquire into
the means of effecting that end. He believed it would not
be necessary that such a committee should sit more than
ten days or a fortnight, and this would not materially in-
terfere with legislation on the subject. (Hear.)
Mr. PULLER appealed to the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer to grant this committee. The paper makers did not
ask for a re-establishment of the Excise duty on paper, but
that the Custom duty on foreign paper should not be taken
off, which would be some sort of an equivalent for
the free importation of foreign paper into this country.
He submitted that, in the present state of things, the
papermakers of this country were entitled to the inquiry
asked for by the hon. member for Dungarvan. It was ad.
mitted that the change made in the trade last year had
done them much injury, and that was made without any
inquiry, and now, when it was sought to make still further
changes, they ought to have some idea of the results
likely to follow. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had
said that there would be a great increase in the raanufac-
tare of paper in this country when the Excise duty was
abolished. That might be true of those qualities in which
there was a large or an unlimited supply of raw material ;
but in the best description—in printing papers and sta-
tionery—no increase whatever in the demand could increase
this country, because the amount. of raw
ma
foreign rags must throw that trade into
thetesruiaplpirliy.asinlimited, and the prohibition or high duties
on the export of
the hands of foreign manufacturers. The increased supply
did, therefore,
Would, therefore,
that the right hon.
gentleman would cencede this
mocstoienaernferostiniyabhroopaed. (Hear, hear.) He
inquiry.
' the Excise duty on paper was not to take p
ber. The amount of Customs duty was
Thea abolition
until
o et o of
..
only about ten or
twelve thousand pounds a year,aa mere trifle in the revenue,
and, therefore, there was really -
no necessity for haste in
the matter, or for precluding the papermakers of this coun-
try from having the inquiry
they asked for previous to any
final decision of the house. (Hear.)
Mr. A. TURNER said the hon. member for Dungarvan
had asked what. Manchester or the Manchester men would
say if the United States before they Were disunited had im-
posed a duty of five per cent. on raw cotton, and at the
same :time a heavy import duty on Manchester manufac-
tured cotton. In such a case he imagined that the view the
Manchester manufacturers would :have taken would have
been this, 4, So long as our hands are unfettered we will
defy competition, and if we fail in doing so we must and
ought to give it up." But that was cii the ;Juppogiticm _

that their hands were =fettered. If the Government were'
to lay a duty of £9 a ton on the export of manufactured
geods, or on the import of the raw material they would not
be in that position. They Would have to enter into compe-
tition under great disadvam'ages, and in the case of the
papermakers, who were placed 1:7 foreign legislation in this
position, he said it was not acting upon the principles of
free trade, as he understood them to expose them to such
unfair and irregular competition. (Opposition cheers.)
Colonel DUNNE supported the motion that the chairman
report progress, and ask leave to sit again. It was impos-
sible for the house to proceed further in the question with-
out instituting the inquiry asked for by the hon. member
for Dungarvan. It had been shown that the papermakers
of Ireland had been all but ruined by the legislation of last
year, and that the benefit of any further changes would, in
fact, only go to the Manchester manufacturers. He should
therefore oppose the proposals of the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer at every stage.
Mr. F. CROSSLEY said he would like to know exactly
how they stood. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for
Manchester (Mr. Turner) said it would be wrong for the
Government to lay a duty of £9 a ton on the export of ma-
nufactures. (Hear, hear.) So said he—but then they could
not interfere with the legislation and the taxation of greign
countries. They made their own laws to suit themselves,
and we must take things as we find them. (Hear, hear, from
the Opposition.) Well, he would endeavour to meet that
cheer. He would remind the house that paper was not
made from rags alone. It was made from cotton waste, from
old ropes, from straw, and from many other materials re-
cently introduced. It was true that some foreign countries
could produce cheaper paper, but was that any reason why
we should pay one penny a pound to the home manufac-
turers on all the paper we consumed more than it was
worth ? But then it was said that the workpeople employed
in the paper-mills would be thrown out of work if the trade
went abroad. Did the papermakers suppose that they would
not get work elsewhere ? Why, in the manufacturing dis-
tricts, large quantities of machinery had been standing idle
for want of hands to work it, and he said it would be far
cheaper for this country to take the income-tax papers of
the papermakers and pension them, rather than to pay a
penny a pound more than it was worth for all the paper that
was wanted. (Oh.) It would be far cheaper to do so. For
his own part, if he was going into the papermaking trade,
he should prefer this country to all others, for its many na-
tural advantages ; but if the papermakers found they could
not compete with foreign makers, they had better give it up.
It would be a great mistake to put an import duty on paper
coming from countries in which there was a prohibition on
the export of rags. It would be only the revival of the sys-
tem of differential duties on free and slave-grown sugar;
and the attempt would break down as signally as it did in
that case. He hoped the house would not stultify itself by
entering upon such a retrograde course as that advocated by
hon. members in this case. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. NORRIS, on behalf of the papermakers of this
country, repudiated any desire for the restoration of pro-
tection. All that they asked for was an inquiry into the
operation of the Customs duties on paper before any deci-
sion was come to by the house upon the question. Those
engaged in the trade saw ruin before them, and all they
asked to avert that ruin was a clear stage and no favour.
The hon. member for the West Riding talked of paper
being made out of other materials than rags; but, in fact,
every one must admit that the paper trade must be taken
out of the category of all other trades with respect to the
supply of,raw material. An extension of the demand in
other trades gave a stimulus to the supply of the raw mate-
rial, but the papermaker could not stimulate the supply of
rags, no matter how great the demand for paper might be.
He was limited as to the command of the raw material in
his own country, and met by a prohibition on their export
in foreign countries. He hoped that the right hon. gentle-
man would not refuse the inquiry that was asked by -the
paper manufacturers of this country.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER desired
this question should be fully understood. There was no
idea on the part of the Government of opposing themselves
to an inquiry on the part of the papermakers. If they
thought that they suffered from legislation abroad, that
would be a matter for representation in the proper quarter
—a course which was preferable to the appointment of a
committee, which would cause great jealousy in foreign
countries. Further, the hon. member for Dungarvan said
be did not propose to maintain the existing Customs duties
upon paper ; but, if that were so, what was his object in
moving for the appointment of a committee ? If that com-
mittee were to do anything at all, as he understood the
matter, it was to inquire into the operation of the Customs
duties on paper, and to report their opinion thereon to the
house, in order that it might take some action in the mat-
ter. What were the facts? The committee had already
agreed to the resolution abolishing the Excise duty of 14s.
Bd. on paper. There remained a Customs duty on the import
of foreign paper, and the proposal was, in fact, that the Cus-
toms duty should be maintained until the committee to be
appointed had inquired and reported, and until the house
had come to some decision upon the subject. And on what
princiLle was this asked ? Why, on a principle which had
been excluded from our whole legislation for the last 20
years. (Cheers.) If that principle were admitted, we should
never be able to remit a single tax or reduce a burden until
we had inquired into the way they weula ba affected. by the
state of things in foreign countries. The principle laid down
by the hon. member was, that the house was to be guided
in legislation by the legislation of foreign countries. If that
legislation happened to be good, they were to follow it, and
if it happened to be bad, they were to follow it also, accord-
ing to the doctrine laid down by the hon. member. But he
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) contended that their
duty was to frame their laws according to the principles of
justice, and to endeavour to induce other nations to follow
their example, but their first duty was to do justice to their
own people. The paper-makers at present laboured under
the oppression of the Excise regulations, the political un.
certainty with reference to the continuance of the duty, and
also foreign competition. It was admitted that of the paper
produced on this country, the greater number of the manu-
facturers did not fear competition. The whole importation
of paper at present did not amount to more than 4 per cent.
Mr. MAGUIRE said it was 10 per cent. on the kind of
paper to which he had alluded.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Yes, but
the hon. member did not wish to limit himself to that par-
ticular kind of paper. (Hear.) As regarded Belgium they
were at present importers of foreign rags, and that being the
case how, he would ask, could they drive the British
manufacturers out of the market P For twenty years they
had acted upon the principle of adopting their legislation
according to circumstances, and he called upon them not
to reverse the principle which had hitherto guided them.
As to science being exhausted as regarded the manufac-
ture of paper, as had been stated, he denied that
such was the case; for that very night there had been
communicated to him an American invention for the
manufacture of paper, by the combination of straw with
cotton rags, and which produced admirable paper. (Hear.)
The right hon. gentleman having concluded,
Mr. BUXTON expressed a hope that the hon. gentleman
(Mr. Maguire) would be satisfied with the discussion which
had taken place, and would not press the question to a divi-
sion.

Mr. MAGUIRE, however, declined to accede to the sug-
gestion.

The committee then divided, when the numbers were—
For reporting progress 54
Against
Majority
The resolution was then agreed to.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCIIRQUER, in answer
to a question by Mr. Hennessy, said the usual course was
that the resolution should be reported to the house, and
then it would be competent for him (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) to insert it in the bill.
The resolution was then reported to the house.
SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES,
The 11 6111404 Chwn unwit intn rnmmittee of supply.
Mr. T. G. BARING said it was not his intention to take
the vote with reference to the volunteer force that night.
On the vote of £210,833 being proposed for the depart-
ments of the Secretary of State for War and that of the
Commander-in- C hief,
Colonel DUNNE said he did not wish to divide the de-
partments of War, but when they came to the details of
the large departments under the Ordnance he felt confi-
dent it would be found that no nation was so badly off
with reference to these details as this country was. As
regarded their foreign defences, he knew that they were
in a very unsatisfactory state, and such would continue to
be the case until a competent person was placed at the
head of the department. He complained of the number
of extra clerks employed in the War-office, and that all
their establishments were in a very disorganised condi-
tion. There should be somebody placed over the engi-
neering department, because, at present, there was no
unity of action whatever. Another arrangement ho com-
plained of was the system of registration which made the
correspondence in the different offices much slower than it
ought to be.
An Hon MEMBER here moved that the house be
counted, but 40 members being present,
Col. DUNNE continued—They had more than a suffi-
dant number of officers to carry on the business of the
army, but they wanted a proper system. He wished to be
informed whether the recom uendations of the committee
that sat last year were to be carried into execution with
respect to the army, and whether it was intended to have
the Under-Secretary of War always a military man. They
were sadly in want of organisation, the more especially
when compared with France, where the system of manag-
ing military affairs was carried to perfection. He had heard
it stated in another place that great difficulties presented
themselves in effecting the improvements which were so
much required, but they could be easily
surmounted. He
ventured to say that if a number of experienced officers as-
sisted him in going through the present estimates, they
would be able to strike out at least a million of money
charged for articles utterly useless, or if they did not strike
it out they would be able to apply it to more useful pur-

1 poses.
Mr. WILLIAMS saw great difference between the
amount of the vote this
Year, and that of last year. He
;hould like to know from the noble lord whether it was in-
t ended to go on with the fortifications. The hen gentleman
the n proceeded to criticise the various heads comprised in
the vote, and showed under each head a large increase,
WN ich be was at 4 loss to understand, lle rculaci that all