THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, he had entertained a sanguine hope that it would be possible that the site of the prison might have been made available for the purposes of St. Thomas's Hospital. He was sorry to say, however, there might be impediments in the way of so desirable an object, and he had therefore in the Bill merely placed the area and the building in the usual manner at the disposal of the Board of Works and the Government. Bill read 1a [Bill 115]. JURISDICTION IN HOMICIDES BILL. [BILL NO. 98.] SECOND READING. Order of the day for the Second Reading read. appeared that in the Queen's Bench-had forgotten to inform them what those omitting debtors who were confined for purposes were to be. having contracted debts fraudulently, and omitting also insolvents who had been remanded by the Insolvent Debtors Courtconsisting together of about fourteen persons-the number of prisoners for debt was six or seven; in Horsemonger Lane Gaol two; and in Whitecross Street fourteen or fifteen; and some of these would have been discharged but for the clause introduced into the Bankruptcy Act, that non-traders should not be entitled to discharge until after two months' imprisonment. Their Lordships would therefore see that the necessity for continuing the Queen's Bench had entirely ceased. The object of the present Bill was to transfer the few prisoners therein confined to Whitecross Street Prison, where there was admirable accommodation for a much greater number of persons than in all human probability would ever be confined there for debt. Their Lordships were probably aware that even the present number of persons in the Queen's Bench would not have been so large but for the practise which had been introducedhe could hardly tell why-under which any debtor in any prison throughout the country might be removed by writ of habeas to the Queen's Bench. Prisoners often availed themselves of this privilege, because in the Queen's Bench, owing to the spaciousness of the buildings, they had amusements-such as playing at ball and other games, by which time was wiled away-and he feared these allurements sometimes had led men to prefer imprisoment to making a discovery and surrender of their property for the benefit of their creditors. He confessed he had much pleasure in presenting this Bill to their Lordships as the first fruits of the Bankruptcy Amendment Act; and he might add, that when the Insolvent Debtors Court was closed, as it would be in a few days, even the present number of prisoners would be reduced; and, meanwhile, the Bill which he now asked leave to introduce would, he hoped, effectually accomplish the end desired. The noble and learned Lord then presented "A Bill for the Discontinuance of the Queen's Prison, and Removal of the Prisoners to Whitecross Street Prison." THE EARL OF DERBY reminded the noble and learned Lord that he had stated that the site of the Queen's Prison was to be appropriated to public purposes, but he VOL. CLXVII. [THIRD SERIES.] EARL DE GREY AND RIPON, in moving the second reading of the Bill, said, their Lordships would remember that a murder had been committed recently by a soldier, and that before the murderer could be tried at the ordinary assizes two or three similar outrages were committed. Persons competent to judge of the feelings of the men who had committed these offences, believed that they had been a good deal encouraged to commit them by the long period which had elapsed before the first offender was brought to justice, that these crimes had become almost a fashion, and that they would have been prevented if there had been a speedy and ready mode of punishing the first of fender. Abroad, as their Lordships would probably be aware, offences of this description, committed by soldiers, would be dealt with by court-martial; but in this country the offender was handed over to the civil tribunals. Important constitutional principles were involved in that state of the law, and the Government did not consider it desirable to make any change in that respect. As their Lordships were aware, at the time of the Palmer poisoning case an Act was passed providing for the removal of the offender from the county in which the offence was committed, and for bringing him up to London to be tried at the Central Criminal Court, which sat very frequently. The provisions of that Act, the 19 Vict., c. 16, could not be made available in this case, because it required that a Bill should be found by a grand jury before the prisoner could be transferred to the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court. Of course, if it were necessary to 2 F wait for this, it would be necessary to this. The parties were bound to make wait for the assizes. The Government, returns of profits and gains on a fair avertherefore, proposed to deviate, to some ex-age of three years, and the district comtent, from the provisions of that Act, and the Bill proposed to confer upon the Court of Queen's Bench in term time, or any Judge of the Superior Courts in vacation, upon the application of the Secretary of State for War, upon his certificate in writing that it would contribute to the maintenance of good order and military discipline if a prisoner under the Mutiny Act charged with any murder or manslaughter were indicted and tried at the Central Criminal Court, power to order the prisoner to be tried at that Court. LORD CHELMSFORD suggested that an alteration in the preamble would be required, as it appeared that there was to be no distinction between cases of murder and cases of manslaughter. After a few observations from the Duke of MANCHESTER, the Earl of DONOUGHMORE, EARL DE GREY, and Lord CRAN COMMONS, Monday, June 23, 1862. MINUTES. PUBLIC BILLS.-1° Consolidated Fund (£10,000,000). 20 Coal Mines; African Slave Trade Treaty; Poor Removal; Chancery Regulation (Ireland); Sheep (Ireland). missioners had power to examine the statements in support or correction of such return. The intention of Parliament was to place the matter in the hands of district commissioners, and he was not aware that there was any legal power on the part of the executive Government which obliged them to institute any particular investigation; but there was no doubt that it was their duty to do so, and he believed that duty was generally performed. But it sometimes happened that complaints were made to the Government with respect to the assessments and judgments of the district commissioners, and not unfrequently the Commissioners of Inland Revenue, if they thought the district commissioners had gone wrong, directed the case to be again submitted to them, and matters were then generally brought to a satisfactory issue. It sometimes happened, that even after the final judgment of the district commissioners, an appeal was made to the Treasury or the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but he did not consider that Parliament had given the Executive any authority to re-try the case. The only case in which the executive Government had authority to correct the proceedings of the assistant commissioners, was where there was a palpable error on their part, or where some new facts had come to light. But, undoubtedly, the determination of the assessments had been placed by Parliament under the power of the Commissioners, and it was the practice of the Government to re-try the cases, as he had already stated. There was no difference in 30 Lunacy (Scotland); Portsdown Fair Discon-practice so far as respected the amount of tinuance; Naval and Victualling Stores. INCOME TAX.-QUESTION. MR. DOULTON said, he would beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether the Commissioners of Income Tax have authority, in cases of Appeal based upon a three years' statement of profits, to dismiss the Appeal without investigating such statement; and whether, in the event of such dismissal (the assessment being under £150 per annum), the Appellant has any remedy by application to the Commissioners of Inland Revenue, the Treasury, or other person or body? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, the state of the case was income. Parties having incomes under £150 a year were in the same position as those whose incomes were larger. SEATS IN THE PARKS.-QUESTION. MR. W. EWART said, he wished to ask the First Commissioner of Public Works, Whether the public are to be accommodated by the restoration of the old, and by a greater number of new seats in Hyde Park and Kensington Gardens, especially round the larger trees therein? MR. COWPER said, it was the practice of the Department to restore the old seats when necessary, and to provide new ones MR. WHITESIDE said, it had been referred to a Select Committee. in such places as the convenience of the public might require. This year about twenty-five new seats would be placed in the Parks to which the hon. Gentleman FAIRS AND MARKETS (IRELAND) BILL. alluded. INDIAN CAMEL CORPS.-QUESTION. MR. E. P. BOUVERIE said, in the absence of his gallant relative (General Buckley), he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, Why the Officers and Men of the Rifle Brigade who composed the Camel Corps in India, commanded by Colonel Ross during the late Mutiny (having received a medal and clasps for services with Sir Hugh Rose's force in Central India), have not received a share of Prize Money? SIR GEORGE LEWIS said, he was not yet in possession of the information requisite to enable him to answer the Question, and would therefore request the right hon. Gentleman to repeat it on a future occasion. IRISH BUSINESS.-QUESTION. MR. SCULLY said, he wished to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether he intends to proceed on Friday next with the five Irish Bills that stand on the Paper for that day, and in what order he intends taking them? QUESTION. MR. VANCE said, that several of his constituents were very much interested in (Ireland) Bill was to be proceeded with? knowing, Whether the Fairs and Markets SIR ROBERT PEEL said, it was the intention of the Government to proceed with it. He hoped to obtain a morning sitting next week for that purpose. DISTRESS IN IRELAND.-QUESTION. SIR ROBERT PEEL stated, that he had received a communication from the noble Lord at the head of the Government, expressing his willingness to lay on the table of the House the whole of the Correspondence with reference to the Skibbereen and Castletown Unions since the month of November, 1861. FORTIFICATIONS AND WORKS. COMMITTEE. Order for Committee read. SIR GEORGE LEWIS: Mr. Massey, SIR ROBERT PEEL stated, that on mittee the Resolution of which I have Sir, in rising to bring before the ComFriday, at the morning sitting, he proposed given notice, I shall probably find it necesto take up the remaining clauses of the Poor Law Bill; and, having got through topics not strictly contained within the sary to advert, I trust briefly, to some these, he hoped at an early hour to pro-limits of that Resolution. The subject of ceed with the County Surveyors Bill and the Weights and Measures Bill. MARRIAGES (IRELAND) BILL. QUESTION. MR. GREGORY said, in the absence of the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Belfast (Sir H. Cairns) he wished to ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for the University of Dublin, Whether it is intended to proceed with the Marriages (Ireland) Bill? MR. WHITESIDE said, there had been no opportunity of conferring with his right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Belfast, but he apprehended that the state of public business would render it impossible to press the measure this Session. COLONEL FRENCH hoped his right hon. and learned Friend would not object to say when he proposed to go on with the Judgments (Ireland) Bill. fortifications is a part of the more general subject, the defences of the country. It is the characteristic of our naval and military system, unlike that of many other countries, that it exists exclusively for defensive purposes-a fact which I think hon. Gentlemen sometimes overlook, and which has been overlooked in some recent discussions on this question. The essence of defence is purely negative; it is intended merely to guard against invasion or attack. Defence is of the nature of an insurance, and insurance against a probable danger may be a prudent act, although subsequent experience shows that the precaution was, in fact, unnecessary. A person who insures his house or his ship is not condemned for folly, although his ship may not be wrecked and his house may not be burnt. That is true with regard to those species of insurance which are intended merely to miti gate an evil, but do not tend to prevent it. cal head of the department, urged by the opinions of his colleagues, by the opinions of the House, and by the opinions of the public. That expenditure has not been adopted contrary to the convictions of those who were at the head of the department for the time being, but it is an expenditure which has been adopted, indifferently, by the executive Government for the time being in deference to what they believed to be the opinions of the public and the exigencies of the public service. However, with regard to those species of be impossible to maintain the general effiinsurance in which military and naval pre- ciency of the department without maintaincautions consist, they have a tendency to ing the existing expenditure, or to increase prevent the evil which is the object of the its efficiency without increasing that exinsurance. In that respect they resemble penditure. And there is one point on the precautions which we are familiar which I am anxious to do justice to some with in the shape of internal police. The gentlemen with whom I have the honour presence of a policeman may prevent a to act in an official capacity. It is, I robbery; the existence of an army may know, an impression on the minds of many prevent the invasion of a country; the ex- gentlemen in this House, and on the minds istence of fortifications may prevent an of many persons in the country, that a attack on a town. Well, Sir, that is the large portion of the present expenditure view taken by those who maintain that the for the army has been, as it were, forced extensive precautions adopted within the on the Government by pressure from the last few years in this country have not Commander in Chief, the Horse Guards, been extravagant; that though England and the permanent officers of the War has not been invaded, though no hostile Department. Now, Sir, that supposiarmy may have been prepared for landing tion is not only not true, but it is the on our shores, this circumstance does not very reverse of being true. The inprove our precautions to have been super-creased expenditure of the War Departfluous, or that if they had been omitted ment has emanated exclusively, or almost the danger against which we have guarded exclusively, from the influence of the politimight not have actually occurred. There are other circumstances which the Committee will bear in mind with respect to the provision which has been made of late years for the defences of the country. During the Crimean war, and also subsequently under the Indian mutiny, the jealousy of the public was almost exclusively directed against what was considered the insufficiency of the army and the inefficiency of the military department. The consequence has been that of late years almost the exclusive attention of the military department has been directed to the improvement of our military system, and the increase of its efficiency. But, Sir, efficiency as those who have had charge of the finances of the country are well aware-efficiency is only another term for increased expense. I put it to any one who has had any experience in the matter whether increased efficiency-in whatever department it may be, whether civil, military, or naval-when it comes to be translated into practice, is not always equiva- compass-comparisons, under different lent to increased expenditure? I know there are some gentlemen who believe, that by some hitherto never defined improvement in the organization of our military system, it would be possible to increase its efficiency without adding to its expense. I have made most careful inquiries on this subject since I have been at the War Department, and I have come to the conclusion, that though by a very jealous and close scrutiny it would be possible to make small reductions in different portions of that large department, it would I do not wish to detain the Committee by going into matters not strictly connected with this Resolution; but, in consequence of references which have been made in this House of late to the supposed extravagant expenditure for the army which is now going on, and to the great increase which that expenditure is asserted to have undergone within a recent period, I wish to lay before the Committee-which I think I can do in a small heads of the military expenditure of the present year with that for 1858-9, which year I think the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli) on a recent occasion selected as the year for comparison. The Estimates for 1858-9 were prepared by Lord Panmure, who was Secretary of State under the Government of my noble Friend at the head of the present Government, and signed and introduced in this House by the right hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite (General Peel). The total charge in the Estimates of that year for the effective force was £9,337,687. Tolmen voted in 1858-9 was 130,135; of that I add, on account of the difference of rank and file, exclusive of Indian depôts the manner in which the Estimates were at and of embodied militia, there were that time prepared-for now every item 113,974. This year the number of men appears on the face of the Estimates- voted was 145,450; of rank and file, exan appropriation in aid of £1,100,000, clusive of Indian depôts, the number was which must be added to make the com- 124,795. The increase over the former parison accurate, and which brings the year in the total number is 15,315; of total for the effective service of 1858-9 rank and file the increase is 10,821. up to £10,437,687. For the non-effective I am desirous of calling the particular force the sum taken in that year was attention of the Committee to the present £2,240,008, making altogether a sum of distribution of the army, because I think £12,677,755 as the Estimate for 1858-9. it will throw a good deal of light on our If I take the expenditure of that year, present position, and also on the financial the amount will be greater by £407,649; question of the probability of our reducing but I refer to this Estimate only, because the present charge. In 1858 the total I can only take the Estimate for this year, force at home, rank and file-effectives, which is £13,172,012 for the effective rank and file-including the embodied force. On account of the Indian army, militia, and excluding the Indian depôts, introduced now for the first time, I deduct was, on the 1st of May, 84,851; on the £730,000, leaving £12,442,012, which, 1st of May, 1859, it was 78,421; on the with £2,130,856 for the non-effective force, makes a total of £14,572,870. The comparison therefore stands thusFor the year 1858-9, total Estimate, £12,677,755; for the present year, £14,572,870, showing an excess for the present year of £1,895,115. That is the sum for which I have to account. Now, we have to take into consideration a portion accounted for by the greater provision in the present year for sea service. In 1858-9 the item for warlike stores and wages was £514,365; in the present year it is £1,023,285, being an increase of £508,920-a sum not charged to the expenses of the regular army, to which I confine myself. There is then £122,887 for the Volunteers this year, which did not enter into the Estimate for 1858, and which, therefore, I exclude. These amount together to about £630,000; therefore the real increase in the expense of the regular army for the present year is £1,265,000. I might put against that a further set-off of an excess of expenditure beyond the Estimates of 1858-9 amounting to £407,649; but that is the fair comparison as between the Estimates of the present year and those of 1858-9; and I will say, that though undoubtedly the expenses of the present year are large and the increase consider able, yet that expenditure is not so excessive or extravagant in amount as some have represented it to be. It is also necessary-and it has a more close bearing on the question before the Committee -to compare the strength of the army in the two years. The total number of 1st of May, 1860, 86,150; on the 1st of May, 1861, 77,683; and on the 1st of May in the present year, 68,518; and there were also at that date in the present year 1,630 men on their passage home. Then, as to the colonies. In 1858 the force in the colonies was 35,000, and the same in 1859. In 1860-1 the force in the colonies was 46,000, and in the present year 55,000. Therefore in the year 1858, on the 1st of May, there were 84,000 at home, and in the colonies 35,000. In May last at home there were 68,000, and in the colonies 55,000. Therefore the Committee will see that the force at home, at the present time, is considerably less than in 1858, and that the force in the colonies is considerably greater. I will now state the principal colonies or foreign stations in which there is an excess at present as compared with 1858. On the 1st of May, 1862, there was an excess over May 1, 1858, in the Mediterranean stations of 2,673; in China, 2,220; in New Zealand, 4,129; in British North America, 11,120. There is another circumstance that the Committee must bear in mind, and which is connected with the question of the distribution of our military force-namely, that soon after the Crimean war and the Indian mutiny many of the regiments on foreign service were changed, and that during the last few years there have been few reliefs sent out to the colonies, but from the present time the system of reliefs will go on with greater regularity, and ten battalions will go out and ten will return annually, five for India and five for the |