position of the House of Commons and | House of Commons; and so long as the military authorities in relation to questions of first appointment and proquestions, such as this, affecting the dis- motion were in the main independent of cipline of the Army. At the outset of the principle of selection, and regulated my remarks, I said that my hon. and themselves by the received and recoggallant Relative deprecated, as I did, nized custom of the Army, the chances the necessity of bringing such matters of interference in such matters by Parbefore the House, but that in doing so liament were comparatively few. But he was only following the lead of the now the theory of the Army being what Secretary of State, whose uncalled-for, is called a Royal Army, governed and incomplete reply to the Question of the controlled by an authority outside and hon. Member for Hackney necessitated independent of Parliament, has been the moving for the Papers necessary to practically exploded by the subjugation, enable the public to form a sound judg-capture, and confinement of the Comment upon the question thus raised by mander-in-Chief within the walls of the the Press and in the House of Com- War Office, while the Horse Guards are mons. But, although the doctrine that now a mere shell, and only represent the Parliament is not a fitting place for the tomb of his separate authority, with discussion or questioning of matters of two cuirassed mutes sitting on black military discipline is undoubtedly sound, horses at the door. Further, by the there have been, and there will be, abolition of the military authority of the special occasions when this salutary rule Lords Lieutenant, we have practically has been, and ought to be, departed all power and patronage now centred in from, and this has been admitted by the the dictatorship of the Secretary of highest constitutional authorities. I State. I say "practically," for the theory find in Clode's well-known book that of the independent authority of the SoveEarl Russell, speaking many years ago reign, acting through the Commanderon a question relating to a court-mar-in-Chief and the Secretary of State, still tial, said There can be no doubt that under that kind of superintendence and supervision which this House ought to exercise, there might arise cases which would require such a proceeding as I have hinted at." And again, Lord Brougham on another occasion said "I have always been one of those who were of opinion that, as a general rule, no interference with the proceedings of any naval or military court-martial, or with any part of the discipline of the Army and Navy, ought ever to be dreamt of; but still there were some exceptions to that rule." And I would myself add that unless the Press, Members of the House of Commons, and the Secretary of State act very differently from what they have done in this instance, those exceptions spoken of by Lord Brougham will inevitably become of more frequent occurrence than heretofore. The times are also changed. So long as not only theoretically, but to a certain extent practically, the Crown exercised an independent authority over the Army and the Militia through the General Commanding-in-Chief and the Lord Lieutenant, there were sound constitutional grounds for matters connected with military discipline, as distinct from military expenditure, not being brought before the exists, though in a fossil state; the independent Prerogative of the Crown in matters military being only brought into play, when it is necessary on an Army question, rudely to override the decision and the will of Parliament, as was done last year on the Army Regulation Bill, as has been done this year in the supersession of the Line officers. It becomes, then, only natural, and even necessary, that men should, under the new system, watch jealously all that relates to the patronage and discipline of the Army, and that, when a legitimate occasion arises, this watchfulness should make itself known and felt within the walls of Parliament. And all the more so, when we see the great influence of the Press, and how that influence has—as I have, I think, shown-been wrongfully brought to bear upon the subject of my Motion. Such, then, being now the true practical position of Army matters, you may rest assured that, whatever may be said as to the inexpediency of such matters being brought before Parliament, there will be occasions when justice to individuals, to regiments, or even to the Army at large, will require that some Member of Parliament should, if needs be, make an appeal in this House from the injustice of officialism to the Cæsar of Parliament and free public opinion. | Tribe on the ground of his riding or his In doing this for my hon. and gallant truthfulness; and that the conclusion had Relative on the present occasion-would been arrived at upon proper evidence. to God he had been here to do it him- Among the hundreds of answers he had self!-I trust I have been temperate in to give it would not be astonishing if he speech, that I have spoken in a becoming had given an indiscreet one; but he still tone, and that what I have said may adhered to the answer he had given in tend to vindicate the character, unjustly this case, as to which he had consulted aspersed, of one of the most distin- the Commander-in-Chief, and which guished regiments in the service. In simply stated the fact that there had conclusion, let me add that the character been an inquiry, and what had been the of a regiment does not belong to itself result of it-information which it would alone, nor yet even to the Army alone; be going too far to refuse when it was but that it is the property of the nation, asked for in the House. It would have and that as such it asks, it claims, it has been indiscreet to have gone into the a right to expect, safe keeping and pro- grounds of that decision; but in the tection from the House of Commons. whole course of his life he hoped he had not fallen into as many indiscretions as the noble Lord had committed that morning. Stating that he did not intend to interfere with questions of military discipline, he had brought a case under review at a time when a Court of Inquiry was duly appointed to examine all the circumstances, and when a young officer had been put under arrest and was about to be brought to trial. This was indiscretion of the most serious kind. As the noble Lord had quoted Mr. Clode's book, he would read therefrom a statement of the law, which was that such documents as were now moved for were confidential papers, and he hoped the House would support him in maintaining that it was undesirable to bring such a case forward in the House, and that the documents which were moved for could not possibly be produced. MR. CARDWELL said, that with reference to the declaration of the noble Lord, that he had only brought the subject forward again on behalf of the hon. and gallant Member for Bewdley, he thought that, under the present circumstances of the case, it ought not to have been brought forward at all. He would confine himself to stating their bearing upon the Motion. In answer to the complaint of the noble Lord that he had not been able to bring the matter forward earlier, | he (Mr. Cardwell) could produce a list of dates in which the Notice stood on the Paper, but was passed over while other matters which followed it were discussed, thus showing that the noble Lord had not availed himself of earlier opportunities. It was no concern of his whether there was or was not an article on this case in The Daily Telegraph; it was no part of his duty to answer in the House what appeared in any newspaper. It was his duty to answer Questions courteously, sufficiently, and briefly, and in the answer he had given on this case, he had not offended against the usages of Parliament. The noble Lord did not complain of the Commander-in-Chief nor of the Adjutant General, yet he had discussed the questions whether the first was right in his finding, and the second in his advice. He (Mr. Cardwell) would not discuss either question; he assumed both were right, and as a matter of discipline the case never came under his cognizance at all until it was disposed of. When the matter became a Parliamentary question he acquainted himself with all the circumstances, and the result was to confirm his assumption that everything had been correctly done; that there was no reason for removing Mr. COLONEL BARTTELOT said, that in answering the Question put to the Secretary for War on a former occasion that right hon. Gentleman had left the impression that he blamed one side and left free from blame the other, and it was under these circumstances that the Papers were asked for. He had hoped to hear it said that the officers of the regiment were not to blame; and the House might be sure that no officer would be "set upon" by his brother officers if he himself behaved properly. COLONEL NORTH said, he could confirm the impression of his hon. and gallant Friend as to the idea conveyed by the answer of the Secretary for War, and that idea was that there was blame attached to the officers of the regiment. He trusted that no body of English officers would ever consent to associate with anybody who was charged with un truth, and had not answered that charge, even although they were compelled to meet such a person in the course of their duty. respect to the Government delaying Supply to so late a period of the Session, and regretted the stifling of discussion upon the position of the writers in Government offices. He denied that the work done by these gentlemen was merely mechanical. MR. AYRTON explained that the persons referred to were mere copying clerks, who had been engaged for the special temporary purposes, and not the regular officials of the Department. NAVY--PRIDEAUX'S PATENT. QUESTION. MR. MAGUIRE rose to ask a Ques SIR JOHN PAKINGTON felt bound to make a strong complaint that a question of this kind should have been brought forward at such a period of the Session, because long before then the Estimates should have been far more advanced than they were. Such was the state of things, however, that they were now, on the 3rd of August, asked to vote upwards of £6,000,000 of money. Such a matter as voting so large a sum of money should have been fully discussed, instead of their being asked to hurry through tion of the Secretary of the Admiralty Supply, and to huddle up the matter at with reference to the ingenious and imthis period of the Session as fast as they could. That had resulted from the portant invention of Mr. Prideaux for forcing down the throat of Parliament the prevention of smoke, and reducing forcing down the throat of Parliament the temperature on board ship. The a Ballot Bill which was really objection-machinery was at once simple and comable to the majority of Members in both Houses. He did not think that they had plete. There appeared to have been some misapprehension as to the expense; any satisfactory reply in reference to the he understood it would not exceed £40 case of Lieutenant Tribe. He agreed that, as a rule, questions of this kind per furnace, whereas the hon. Gentleman had said that its cost was too exshould not be brought before the House; cessive to allow of its being applied to and he would not discuss whether this Her Majesty's vessels. Could the hon. case should or not be an exception to Gentleman confirm that statement? if the general rule. He would press, however, upon the Secretary for War that not, was he (Mr. Maguire) right in thinking it probable that a further essay at the present period of change ques- would be made of its merits? tions of this kind should be avoided as far as possible; and he would say no more of the case of Lieutenant Tribe than to say that it was an unpleasant one, and such as it was most desirable at this particular period, when they were re-modelling the constitution of the Army, should not arise, because such cases would tend to shake public confidence in the propriety of the changes which were now being brought about. SIR HENRY STORKS held that it was not fair to the service nor Lieu tenant Tribe himself to indulge in the observations made by the noble Lord opposite. As regarded the answer given by his right hon. Friend to the hon. Member for Hackney on a former occasion, it was not given without due consideration or consultation with the Commander-in-Chief, who fully concurred in every word of it. Lieutenant Tribe came in under the old system, and not under the new, and certainly he was not one of the so-called "Cardwell's men." MR. SCLATER-BOOTH said, he fully concurred in the observations made with MR. SHAW LEFEVRE said, that in the remarks which he had made the other evening with reference to this invention he had only intended to convey that it was both costly and complicated. The invention had been before the Admiralty for some 10 years, and it had not been adopted. He believed it was chiefly owing to its great cost that the cost of these furnace doors was now diminished, and that the complication was also reduced; and he thought it probable that a further trial would be given to the invention. SUPPLY-CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES. (In the Committee.) (1.) £178,912, to complete the sum for the Science and Art Department. MR. SCLATER - BOOTH said, he should like to have some explanation as to the defalcation at South Kensington which occurred the year before last. He was informed that Mr. Simpkins had absconded, and the question of proceedings against him had been referred to the Solicitor of the Treasury. That was five or six months since; and he wished to know whether any assets had been recovered to reimburse the Treasury? He also wished to know whether the place vacated by Mr. Simpkins had been filled up; and, if so, what security had been taken that the accounts would be better kept? If the place had not been filled up, what arrangement had been made for the due accounting of the Department? He should also like to know the result of the difference between the Treasury and the Education Department with regard to the position of Mr. Cole, and whether he would be responsible for the accounts for the coming year? He hoped the recommendations of the Committee on Public Accounts, having reference to the whole subject, had received the attention they deserved. Some definite principle should be laid down on which the different Departments should render their appropriation account for the purpose of audit. If South Kensington were directly managed and controlled by the central authority at Whitehall, the House would be much less grudging in its Votes of Supply. MR. BAXTER said, the careful attention of the Government, and especially of the Treasury, had been directed to the Report of the Committee on Public Accounts. A departmental Committee was appointed, consisting of officers of experience and long standing in the Treasury, to consider the whole subject, and a Minute was in course of preparation which went fully into all the matters referred to. No doubt the defalcation which had occurred at South Kensington was a very unfortunate affair; but, looking to the Public Accounts as a whole, things had worked satisfactorily. He thought, however, that it would be probably necessary to adopt some uniform practice to check the proceedings of parties who had to account for public money. Before next Session, he hoped to be able to produce such a plan-one that would give universal satisfaction, and until that was done he could give no further answer. MR. RYLANDS thought the defalcation referred to of not less than £8,000 a most discreditable transaction in connection with these accounts, and one that the Committee ought not to have allowed to pass by unnoticed; for outof-doors there was an impression that the heads of the departments at South Kensington must have been grossly neglectful of the public interests, or such a defalcation could not have occurred. MR. W. E. FORSTER admitted that the defalcation could not be passed over without animadversion. Blame must rest somewhere, and he fully expected questions to be asked on the subject. The defalcation had been £7,704, of which £1,337 had been recovered. Mr. Simpkins took away £600, which he sent back immediately. In three years, Mr. Simpkins would have been entitled to a pension of £250 a-year; and that the country had saved. With regard to the questions put, he had to state that the appointment of accountant had not yet been filled up, the duty was being performed by the bookkeeper, and the assistant bookkeepers; and the securities taken against defalcations were theseto allow no money whatever to remain in the office; extra receipts to be paid every day into the Bank of England, and money wages to be drawn and paid the same day. He did not consider Mr. Cole to blame in the matter; but thought that the evil had arisen from a system which had grown up of large balances being due from one office to another, and the fact that the defalcation had not been found out was owing to the system of auditing the accounts whereby the vouchers had not been accessible at South Kensington. He did not deny that a certain amount of blame might attach both to the permanent head of the Department, and also, he acknowledged, to his noble Friend and himself as the really responsible heads. If they had been as careful as they now saw they ought to have been, they should have dismissed Mr. Simpkins. The case was this-there had not been the slightest ground for suspecting dishonesty; but they had reason to believe that he was not an efficient officer-the least efficient officer at South Kensington. They had seriously considered whether they should dismiss him; but they erred on the score of kindness to him as an old servant. He doubted whether any hon. Member would not have taken the same course at the same time. He looked upon Mr. Cole's position at South Kensington as that of a working partner rather than an accountant. MR. BOWRING asked, Whether, as the School for Naval Architecture was to be transferred to Greenwich, the Vote for the future would be included in the Navy Estimates, and not under the head of Science and Art. He hoped that the building at South Kensington would be available for some other branch of science and art. MR. MACFIE suggested that some of the art treasures stowed away in the British Museum cellars should be sent round to the different schools of art. He also called attention to the unsatisfactory state of the Patent Museum. MR. HINDE PALMER said, the present state of the Patent Museum was a disgrace to the country. MR. W. E. FORSTER said, the buildings at South Kensington were no longer under the control of the Council for Education, but that they had been transferred to the Office of Works. When the Naval School was removed, it would certainly admit of more space being devoted to other matters in connection with art and science. He was happy to say, as a reference to a kindred subject, that the success of Bethnal Green Museum was very remarkable, far beyond expectation. The fact must be most gratifying to Sir Richard Wallace, who had lent his magnificent collection of paintings and other works of art-probably the finest ever possessed by any private individual-for the inspection of that portion of the public which had least opportunity of such enjoyment. The visitors last week at Bethnal Green Museum were over 37,162, as compared with 17,024 at South Kensington. Vote agreed to. (2.) £89,201, to complete the sum for the British Museum. were comparatively moderate in amount -about £3,000 in four years. When Mr. Wood undertook, however, to extend them, with a view to discover the site of the Temple of Diana, the expense to be incurred became necessarily very large. There were two other objects in view-first, to obtain interesting inscriptions, and, secondly, any architectural and sculptural remains that might be valuable. The expense of making the excavations down to the end of last financial year amounted to no less than £8,000. They were carried on under a firman of the Porte, without which we could neither excavate nor carry away anything that might be discovered. An apprehension prevailed. that the firman was not likely to be renewed; it therefore became the duty of the Trustees either to apply a portion of their own funds so as to proceed with the excavation before the firman expired on the 8th of March, or apply to the Treasury for the requisite means. It was under these circumstances that the excavations were discontinued at the end of April. No time was lost by discontinuing them, as such works in Asia could only be carried on between October and the first week in May. The Trustees having been informed by the Foreign Office that the Porte had consented to re-grant the firman for one year, they desired Mr. Wood to make an estimate of the sum that would be necessary to complete the excavations. He estimated it at £6,000 -£3,000 to be expended this year, and £3,000 in 1873. They immediately applied to the Treasury, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who took the greatest possible interest in these excavations, stated, in reply, his readiness to grant by Supplementary Estimate £3,000 this year, and £3,000 the next. He thought he might say, in connection with these excavations, that one of their objects had been completely successful MR. SPENCER WALPOLE said, the Estimate called for very few remarks. There was an apparent diminution of £20,000 on the Vote this year as compared with the last; but it was not a namely, in ascertaining the exact site real diminution in the ordinary expendi- of the Temple of Diana. Another of ture of the Museum. The £20,000, in their objects had been partly fulfilledfact, was a sum granted last year for a namely, in obtaining some valuable and special purpose-to purchase the Castel- interesting inscriptions. The value of lani Collection, so rich in gold orna- the architectural and sculptural remains ments and gems. With reference to the could only be determined when they had excavations at Ephesus, which he wished been brought to this country. The Goon that occasion to refer to, they were vernment had also brought in a Supbegun nearly eight years ago. The ex-plemental Estimate for two other purpenses incurred in the first excavations poses connected with the Museum-the |