The Sun. — 1862-05-31 (London, England)

PURCIASE IN THE ARMY. Sir DE L. EVAN, on tho motion for going into committee, moved that, in the opinion of this house, no further postponement ougla to take place in giving effect to the promises of Govtnment, that the command of regiments should no longer be purchasable, and that the promotions to thatrank should henceforth be regulated by election upon the responsibility of the Commander-in-Chief. The hon. and galant member, who stated that he was labouring under illhealth, was very indistinctly heard, was understood to urg the usual arguments which he has previously advancEd on this subject. Sir G. LEWIS Said that the committee who had dab°. rately investigated this subject in 1860, and which included amongst its members the Duke of Somerset, Mr. Sidney Herbert, and otherdistinguished persons, had recommended that the commission of lieutenant-general should not be obtained by purchase, but be in the appointment of the Commander-in-Chief. Some other recommendations hz been made. It le as decided that 12 new regiments should be created, and it was thought it would be desirable that before making any alteration in the system they should have the practice of non-purchase worked in these regiments in which it was to be tested. Any alteration in the system would be attended with great difficulties in detail that would practically render it impossible to be carried at the present day. (Hoer.) He also reminded the house fiomrmreeidmiabtoursailntgertahtieonp,erwsohnicshwhwoohualdd oamount e txop xe n 7 :1%06:0f 0, any purchased commissions in the army. He contended that there was no analogy between the naval and military service to justify the applying the rule of one to the other, for they were quite dissimilar. lie adverted to the fact that in India where the practice was voluntary and not sancioned by law, it prevailed to a considerable extent. Tho right honourable gentleman went through different other grounds in support of his views, and said that ho must oppose the motion of the hon. and gallant member by moving the previous question. General PEEL objected to the recommendation of the commission, and particularly to the House of Commons interfering with the command or the discipline of the army. The report of the commission was signed by six out of the ten members of which that body was composed, while the majority of the military members protested against the decision of their colleagues. After some observations from Colonel Nonni, Lord STANLEY spoke at some length in defence of the recommendation of the commissioners, enumerated the various objections which were urged against the existing system of purchase, and passed in review and comb ate d those which were put forward in opposition to the proposal to grant Preraotl9ll. by 5910citien) upon the responsibility of  the Commander-in-Chief. The Government might excuse themselves as they pleased, but as a Cabinet they were certainly pledged to carry out the recommendation of the commissioners. They had formally given a pledge to do so in that house ; and although that pledge might go the way of some other reforms, the present was not an age that was likely to be tolerant of abuse; and he'ventured to say that in a quarter of a century not a reg of the system of piachase would be remaining. Lord PALMERSTON opposed the motion, addressi,ng himself particularly to the arguments of Lord Stanley, and justified the Government for having changed their purpose. On a division the motion was negatived by 217 _to 62. Colonel DICKSON directed attention to the recent agrarian murders perpetrated in Irel:.in'l, and the organisation, equipment, and employment of the Irish constabulary. He ointed out that the cost of maintaining the police force had increased by £120,000 in the 16 years ending 185 S; and in the four subsequent years it had been augmented to the et hneo remx peels, seuomf pof rot7i d7ion,gB6tBh;e imn aenddwiidthonbtaorrawhasich. thnerencow: plained of the largo amount that was expended in the instruction of the force in the use of the Enfield rifle, which he argued was- not a fit weapon to place in -their hands; condemned the system of police centralisation in Dublin ; and contended that the force ought to bo more of a civil, and less of a military character, and be brought more in contact with the people. He should not move f6r a committee of inquiry, but leave the matter in the hands of the Chief Secretary, in the hope that the right hon. gentleman would give it the consideration to which it was entitled. Mr. SCULLY then rose, and was in the act of addressing the house when an hon. member moved that it be counted. The house was accordingly counted but at 20 mit:rams toeight o'clock,