bon. member for Montrose should be such an advocate for a standing army; for undoubtedly, if the militia force was given up, the number of our regular troops must be considerably increased; for with the large armies which were kept up on the continent, no man at all acquainted with military affairs would say, that the country would be safe with such a regular force as we now had without the militia. On the most pressing occasions during the war, the services of the militia had been most effective. The hon: member was quite mistaken in supposing that there were so many exceptions from the liability to the ballot as he had stated; for if a member of parliament were ballotted he must serve, or find a substitute, as well as any other man in the country. He would appeal to all who were acquainted with military affairs, as to the efficiency of the militia during the war, and could bear testimony to the good effects which had resulted from the interchange of the militia between the two kingdoms. Mr. Secretary Peel said, he could not bring himself to enter into a serious discussion on a subject introduced as the hon. member had introduced this. If the hon. member were himself quite serious upon it, he would surely have given notice of a motion and had it regularly brought forward; and when he did, after what had passed, he would no doubt feel it necessary to come better prepared on the subject. The hon. member was quite mistaken in supposing that his privilege as a member of parliament would protect him from the ballot. He feared that the only exemption the hon. member could claim must be on account of age, for he knew of no other. If he abstained on this occasion from adverting to the services of the militia, he could assure the House that it was not from being insensible to the great value and efficiency of their services, for whether he referred to the noble patriotism which it had displayed in volunteering into the regular service, or to their effective conduct in Ireland, he thought they deserved the highest praise. Mr. Hume denied, that he had intended to cast any reflection on the services of the militia. He objected to the body as an unnecessary force, when we might have a much more effective one for the same expense. He could assure the right hon. gentleman that he was quite serious on the subject, though he had laughed at his joke about the supposed ground of his exemption. He did not think he was quite so venerable as to have that claim. [Some members here said "forty-five is the age"] If that were the age, he feared he must admit the exemption. The House, having resolved itself into a committee of supply, 4 Sir H. Hardinge said, it was not necessary to detain the committee at any length in stating the particulars of the estimates. The whole amounted to 328,5344., exclusive of 1,4181. for out-pensions for the yeomanry staff. The amount last year was 283,1987., but the apparent increase this year arose from having the sum of 71,0001. for the pay of militia serjeants and for local militia transferred from the army accounts. These being set off against the sum of last year's estimate would make a diminution of about 26,000l., which added to the saving from the reduction of a number of officers, and non-commissioned officers, would make after this year a permanent saving of 61,000Z. The whole expense would be very different from the 400,0004. at which the hon. member for Montrose had put it. There was, it was true, upwards of 300,0001. for the whole estimate, but then that arose from the large force kept up during the war, and the consequently large sum in allowance for disembodied militia. The officers received a larger allowance in proportion to their length of service, than they could have expected at the time they were embodied. To those officers (lieutenants) who had served three years there would be an allowance of 5s. per day, and those who served for a shorter time would receive 4s. per day for life. The paymasters had no legal claim, but they had an equitable one, and would be allowed as superannuated lieutenants. The adjutants would receive 7s., their full pay allowance. The serjeants of British militia would not be disbanded, but the serjeants of Irish militia would receive, according to the recommendations of their colonels, an allowance of 1s. per day. The corporals, who were entitled only to a retiring pension of 5d. per day, after twenty years' service, would receive that sum without reference to their length of service, as corporals. He would not go into further details, as it was intended to revise the whole of the militia acts, and to consolidate them into one act, which would be introduced in the next session. He concluded by moving, "That, 247,3047♪ be granted for defraying the charge of the Disembodied Militia of Great Britain, and for the Out Pensions of the Regular Militia of Great Britain and Ireland, for the year 1829." Colonel Sibthorp complained of the injustice that was done to many individuals, who would have no allowance, although they had served thirty years, and all because they had not attained a certain rank at times mentioned in certain acts of parliament. The object of the present hasty measure was injustice, as had been most part of those brought forward this session, Mr. Hume said, that though he objected to the whole establishment of the militia, he did not object to the clear and candid manner in which it had been brought forward by the right hon. and gallant officer. He was sorry the hon. member for Limerick (Mr. S. Rice) was not in his place, as it was to him, while in office, that they were indebted for some of the intended alterations, and he regretted that the hon. member did not continue long enough in office to complete them. He contended, that the House had as much right to interfere with the management of the militia, as with that of the regular army; inasmuch as both descriptions of force were created by act of parliament. He insisted that he had been guilty of no mistake in the statement which he had previously made and argued, that if the proposition which he had submitted to the House had been adopted, the country would not have been put to an expense of nearly 400,000l. a year for the disembodied militia. How different was the course pursued in the United States of America. It appeared by returns made to Congress, that the militia in those states amounted to eight hundred and seventynine thousand nine hundred and sixty-eight men in the year 1822, and that it did not cost the States a farthing. What was the result of their system? In the course of three or four years the United States would be released entirely from the debt which it had incurred for the revolutionary war, and also for the expenses of resisting the attacks which we had subsequently made upon them. He thought that the gallant officer was entitled to the thanks of the country for the reduction which he had already made in these estimates. If the gallant officer would carry it further next year, he would find him more ready to grant an additional number of regular troops than to throw away the public money, in keeping up the militia in time of peace. What was the duty which the militia had performed since the termination of the war? Since the peace, the country had only been benefitted by the service of seven of these corps, though it had expended nearly 4,000,000l. in supporting them. The House had heard inuch of the hardships inflicted on the population of France by the conscription laws of that country. Now, he looked upon our present militia system to be nearly as bad; for it took a number of individuals from settled habits, and had thereby a tendency to demoralize the lower orders. He did not think that the necessity of keeping up the militia as a regular force in time of peace had been at all made out, and he now gave notice that next session he would do his best to get rid of it. He had no objection to the present grant; for if the system was to be continued, the sum now proposed was as reasonable as it possibly could be. Colonel Wood said, that he had not defended the keeping up of the militia in time of peace, on account of the services which it had rendered the country since the close of the war, but on account of the necessity of having it in a state of preparation, in case of the sudden breaking out of a war. If we had not such a force in existence, we must have a larger amount of regular soldiers. The reference to the militia of America proved nothing; for America was not, like England, within a few hours' sail of a rival country, where a large standing army was regularly kept up. He had never said, that we had only four regiments of regular troops at home; but that we had only four complete regiments of regular troops in England. There were dépôts of other regiments in England, to meet the drain made upon that part of them which was serving in the colonies. The rest of our regular force was stationed in Ireland. Sir G. Philips thought there was considerable hardship in the proposed reduc tion of the paymasters of militia; es pecially as they were appointed to what was called, by various acts of parliament, the permanent staff of the militia. They were called on to give security for the proper discharge of their duties were obliged to reside where the arms of the regiment were kept; they were pre cluded from following any other business; they were induced to give up other pra they 1 spects for what the legislature denominated a permanent situation; and now the gallant officer came forward with a proposition, which turned them adrift on the world, and left them a prey to disappointed expectations. When the Revenue Board in Ireland was abolished, the commissioners were allowed pensions to the amount of 2,0001, a year, as a remuneration for their past services. A different policy, however, was pursued towards these paymasters of militia. Now, if justice was done in one of these cases, it was quite clear that injustice was done in the other. The resolution was agreed to. was not new. It prevailed so long ago Mr. Cripps was also of opinion, that the first part of the bill could not be exe objectionable clauses. He thought it was so necessary that landlords should be made to pay the poor-rates for houses instead of the tenants, that if this bill should be thrown out, he should be ready to introduce a measure himself to embrace that object. Mr. S. Bourne said, it was impossible for any person to read the preamble of this bill without seeing that the object of the mover of it was highly beneficial. His doubts were as to the practicability of the means by which the hon. mover in-cuted. It prescribed actual starvation; tended to carry it into effect. It was and neither magistrates nor parish officers notorious, that, in many agricultural pa- could enforce it. At the same time, as he rishes, particularly in the south of Eng- approved of the latter part, he should be land, it had become the practice to make sorry that it should not be sent to a coma money payment to able-bodied labour-mittee, in which they might get rid of the ers, in proportion to the number of their children. That practice had grown into a flagrant abuse; and many individuals contrived by it to get the labour of their farms done at the expense of the parish. This bill was intended to correct such abuses; but he conceived the means which it proposed to be impracticable to that end. It had often been said, that the more they wandered from the act of the 43rd of Elizabeth, the greater were the abuses they generated. Now, the present bill was a deviation from both the letter and the spirit of that law. Instead offsetting to work those who were not able to maintain their children," the practice against which the bill was directed was, to pay money into the hands of the parents. That practice, however bad, Mr. Burrell would be sorry, that the bill would not go into a committee, although there were parts of it of which he did not approve. That part, however, met with his approbation which went to make the landlord pay the rates instead of the tenants; and for this reason, that, as the law at present stood, there were persons going about the country erecting cottages, which were let to pauper tenants, and that practice would be restrained by this pro vision of the bill. Sir G. Philips supported the bill, and thought the country was greatly indebted to the hon. member who had introduced it with so much ability. י Sir T. Fremantle said, the bill had been much misrepresented. It was not to starve the labourer, but to raise his character, and enable him to obtain adequate wages. The present practice of paying labourers' wages was quite contrary to law, and was as pernicious as it was illegal. Under its influence whole districts had been reduced to pauperism; and if suffered to continue, all the labourers in the country would be placed in the same situation. This bill would not deprive the poor of their reward they were already deprived of that. The labourers did not get adequate wages. In many parishes they were put up to auction, and their labour sold for 2s. or 4s. a week. In some cases, the farmer had the service of the labourer without paying any wages. This system should be put a stop to; but it never would, except by an act of the legislature; for the parishes found their advantage in it, and the overseers were too indolent to alter their present system, unless they were compelled. The bill seemed to him likely to restore the character of the labourer, and ultimately to give him a fair remuneration for his labour.. Mr. F. Palmer thought the House had lost sight of the fact, that the present system had originated in the poverty of the farmers. As to the proposition for making landlords of cottages pay the poorrates instead of the tenants, he considered it most unjust; for cottages were generally erected on estates as a matter of charity, for the convenience and comfort of the labourers, and there was no gentleman who did not pay more for the repairs of those cottages than was received by way of rent. Mr. Secretary Peel said, he fully concurred with the hon. mover, that the system of paying the wages of labour out of the poor-rates was highly objectionable; but, though admitting the proposition of the hon. member in the abstract, he doubted whether a system which had long existed, and which had been uniformly acted on for so many years, could safely be removed otherwise than gradually. No one could be more fully convinced than he was of the extent to which that species of payment was detrimental to the interests of the poor themselves, affecting as it did the market. There was, in fact, scarcely any thing that more tended to lower the condition of the labouring poor. There was one difficulty which stood in the way of the measure in its present form; namely, that state of the law which prevented what might be called the cir culation of labour, that which confined labourers to the limits of their own parishes.' The great objection which he had to the bill as it stood was, that it proposed to effect a change quite suddenly, and a change, too, of the highest importance," one that ought only to be brought about," if at all, with the utmost discrimination. Mr. Western was of opinion, that, in He joined the hon. member as heartily as " the present state of the country, the adop- any one could do, in condemning the tion of the measure would be attended existing system: but it was a practice with any thing but advantage. He feared which had subsisted for forty or fifty that the operation of the bill would un-years. If the case were ten times stronger avoidably be, to throw those out of employment whose relief it was chiefly intended to promote. Bad as the existing system of poor-laws was, it yet, when well Mr. Mundy trusted, that the House would go into a committee on the bill. The details of the measure could then be fully and fairly discussed. than it was, the remedy proposed ought not to be adopted until after mature consideration, and a notice to the parties interested. It could not be otherwise 1 irresponsible individuals could manage the affairs of the institution properly. The gallant officer was wholly incorrect in his assumed facts. He had stated, that estates, apparently worth 60,000l. or 70,000 a than gradual; for there was a necessity in the present condition of the poor, that would paralyze any act of parliament. Were it allowed to proceed to its extreme limit, it would disturb all the relations of labour. If a man were suddenly and un-year produced but 22,000l. That was expectedly told, that he could no longer obtain any allowance for his wife and children, he would remember that the moment he deserted them they would be entitled to relief, and thus the greatest temptation would be held out to him to desert them and his work too. Various means could be resorted to for the purpose of evading the provisions of the bill. Notwithstanding the view which he could not help taking of the subject, he would agree to the bill being committed. The bill was read a second time. GREENWICH OUT-PENSIONS BILL.] Sir G. Cockburn moved for leave to bring in a bill, "for transferring the management of Greenwich Out Pensions, and certain duties in matters of Prize, to the Treasurer of the Navy." Sir J. Yorke expressed his disapprobation of the bill, which was one of the consequences of the former measure introduced by his hon, and gallant friend. The end of the present proceeding would, he feared, be the introduction of a bill to enable Messrs. Robins, or some other auctioneers, to knock down Greenwich Hospital, its domes, its spires, and its pillars, to the best bidder. Sir Charles Pole had formerly stated, in that House, that the mismanagement which prevailed in that establishment would inevitably lead to that result. The fact was, that the mismanagement had been very great. While the estates belonging to the hospital were set down as worth between 60,000l. and 70,000l. a year, he believed the sum netted was not more than 22,000l. a year; and it would hardly be believed that 16,000l. per annum was expended for carrying on the affairs of that establishment, when they might be transacted for 4,0001. He protested against these bills, which went to do away entirely with the charter of this corporation. Sir G. Cockburn said, that the abuses to which the gallant officer had alluded imperatively called for these bills. In bringing the first measure forward, he had found fault with no individual-he had merely objected to the system. It was wholly impossible that four or five hundred not the fact. The average, for five years, } of the receipts of the Hospital, amounted to 40,000l. per annum. That an alteration was necessary in the system was quite ob+ vious, from what had recently occurred when the deputy treasurer walked off with the funds of the hospital. So badly was the business of the hospital managed, that it was found impossible to punish that individual. He was brought into a crimis nal court, and the indictment against him contained six or seven counts; but still he.. was acquitted, because it was found impossible to make out whether he was the officer of the king, or of the admiralty, or of the treasurer of the hospital; so that they could not take the money from him, though he was now living at Greenwich in : possession of his spoil. This could not again happen, because by the bill recently passed, a certain responsibility was attached to the individual therein mentioned. Leave was given to bring in the bill, eta HOUSE OF COMMONS. STANDING ORDERS RESPECTING PRIVATE BILLS.] Mr. Hume rose, to bring forward two motions, of which he had given notice, relating to the Standing Orders with regard to Private Bills. He was, in the first instance, about to move "that. notice in writing, of the day proposed for the third reading of every Private Bill, be given by the agent soliciting the bill, to the clerks of the Private-bill office, one clear day before such third reading." A Standing Order to that effect already exist». ed with respect to the second reading of Private Bills, and, by means of it, all members who might either wish to oppose or support the second reading of any such bill, were notified of the day upon which it would be read a second time, and could attend in their places to take part in the discussion upon it. He wished to apply a similar principle to the third reading of all: Private Bills, in order to afford an oppor tunity to all members who might be interested in them to be present, either to support or oppose the passing of such... bills. He had intended to propose that a va |