The Sun.
London, England, 1868-03-27 00:00:00

THE ARMY ESTIMATES.

The house went into committee of supply, and the vot-
ing of the army estimates was proceeded with. The sums
required for clothing, barracks, hospitals, mid yeomanry
caY6lry llayipg bola agreed to,;

.£346,897 was proposed for the expense of the Volun-
teer force.

Colonel BIRTTELOT said it was much to be regretted
that so small an addition to the vote was made, because the
result might be a dwindling away of the force altogether.
It was but justice that if a body of men gave their time
to the country they should not be called upon to incur
expenses in going to drill when such d►ill could not be
performed at headquarters.
Mr. D. GRIFFITH thought the State did very little
for this very admirable body, and he was of opinion that
the expense of procuring their clothing ought not to be
cast upon the different corps. It appeared to him to bo an
attempt to ride the willing horse to death.
Colonel SYKES also thought the uniforms ought to bo
supplied by the Government, because it was a great
hardship to call upon mon who did the state service to
do so out of their own private resources. When the
different contributions the men ha I to make• were con-
sidered, it was extraordinary that th, number of the body
was so well kept up. lie did not think the men ought to he
called upon to pay their own expenses on such occasions
as the proposed review at Portsmouth. If the Govern-
mtit wished the volunteer army to continuo in an ctlici,R►t
state, they would soon:.r or later be compelled to act n►ore
liberal towards them than heretofore.

Colonel LINDSAY was of opinion that it Inv absolutely
necessary that the capitation grant should be increased.
As the Government had decided n a to do so, he
was afraid the inefficiency of the movement would
be the result. if the Government thought it was not
worth while to keep up the movement, they should say 50
plainly. They, of cntrse, could not expect anything this
year, but if something was not done ncxt year the volun-
teers would be a very small proportion of what they were
at present.

Sir J. PABINGTON said the intention of the volun-
teer movement was that the volunteers should. be a self-
supporting corps. If they bad proposed an increase of the
vote, they would have bad a number of members objecting
to it.

On the order of the day for going into committee on
the Election Petitions and Corrupt Practices at Elections
Bill,

Mr. A. MITCHELL moved a resolution affirming that
while the house earnestly desires to provide the best tri-
bunal for the trial of controverted elections, and to insure
the detection and punishment of bribery and corruption,
it is not prepared to assent to any measure which aims
at the destruction of its ancient privilege to hold in its
own hands the power of determining who aro its mem-
bers. If this bill passed, the House of Commons would be
under the power of a judge appointed by the Crown. He
suggested that instead of the proposed tribunal, the tri-
bunal should consist of one member from each side of the
house, with a legal assessor, and that they should report
t'..) the house, and if the report was not questioned within
a certai❑ time, it should be acted upon.
Mr. WHITBREAD said the plan of the hon. member
was itself open to objection, and would bring back the
great evil which Grenville's Act was intended to remedy,
the discussion in the house of the merits of election peti-
tions. The three great objects to be insured wore an im-
mediate trial, a trial on the spot, and a trial before a person
well versed in the law, and these objects would bo attained
by the bill. At present the house, as a house, had no
power over the trial of election petitions ; it did not, as a
house, appoint the committee, nor could it question the
decision of the committee.

Sir G. BOWYER opposed the amendment, and sug-
gested that instead of the tribunal proposed a special com-
mission should be appointed.
Mr. 11. BERKELEY considered the bill was merely an
attempt to get rid of the necessity of resorting to secret
voting.

Sir S. NORTHCOTE said the objections of tho mover
of the resolution really came to this, that it was only the
House of Commons that was interested in the purity of
elections.

Mr. W. MARTIN thought the bill would bo a very
tyrannical one if it did not define clearly what bribery
was.

Mr. J. S. MILL said if the question wore between the
bill and the amendment he should have no hesitation in
deciding for the bill ; not that he thought it came up to
what it ought to be. It contained only one expedient,
but that was a strong one. If they wished to put down
bribery they mast resort to many expedients. There was
some reason in the objection against turning the jurisdic-
tion of the house over toa judge appointed by the Crown ;
but one way of getting over this would be to make the act
temporary. Ile suggested that thole should b 3 an inquiry
into every election before a tribunal of barristers, with an
appeal to a committee of the house.
Mr. Sergeant GASELEE thought the best tribunal
would be the common law judges, and suggested that two
judges should be chosen by ballot for the trial of each
petition. _ _ _

Mr. BOUVERIE adduced a variety of reasons against
the bill, and warned the houso against placing in the
hands of one person the power of saying whether a mem-
ber of the house, who might be the leader of the house or
the leader of the opposition, was guilty of bribery, and re-
commended the withdrawal of the amendment.

Mr. AYItTON joined in the recommendation, but ob-
jected to the bill, because he conceiTed that the bill was
artfully designed fur the purpose of encouraging bribery
and corruption.

Mr. IVA LPOLE answered some of the obj.;etioes to the
measure.

Mr. HENLEY strongly objected to the t►ansfer of the
jurisdiction of the house to a single m►n.
Mr. CRAUFURD moved the adjournment of the house,
but the motion was not seconde,l.

The amendment was then negatived without a division,
and the house went into committee on the bill.
In reply to Mr. AYKTON,
Mr. DISRAELI said ho proposed to bring in analogous
bills for Ireland and Scotland.
The house then resumed.

The house having gone into committee on the Mutiny
Bill,

Mr. OTWAY moved to insert the words in clause 22 to
provide that no court-martial shall have power in time of
peace to sentence any soldier to corporal punishment.
Sir J. PAKINGTON said a great concession was made
last session, when the power of inflicting corporal pun-
ishment was reduced to a great extent. Another reason
against the motionlwas that a roya: commission was at this
time inquiring into the whole system of military punish-
ment.

Mr. Headlam, Captain Vivian. and Colonel Wilson
Patten all stated that as they were members of the com-
mission they should abstain from voting.
Sir C. RUSSELL said they were getting a better class
in the army, but it was necessary to retain this power in
order to maintain discipline among the ruffians in the
army.
The amendment was carried by 152 to 127.
Another amendment was carried against the Govern
ment, though no division was taken upon it, by which the
power of billeting on private houses in Ireland was
abolished.

The remaining orders were disposed of, and the house
adjourned at 20 minutes to 2 o'clock.