what were the intentions of government with respect to
the maintenance of the grant.—The Earl of DERBY,
after some explanations as to the statements made by
himself and the Solicitor-General, said that the government
had no present intention of altering the existing
law, and that ample notice would be given should
circumstances arise to induce the government to take
another course.—An animated but desultory discussion
then arose, in which Lord Grey, Lord Derby, the Earl
of Harrowby, the Marquis of Lansdowne, and the
Bishop of Cashel, took part, after which the subject
dropped.

On Thursday, the 22nd, the Earl of DERBY moved
the second reading of the St. Albans Disfranchisement
Bill, which, after some conversation, was agreed to
without opposition.—A discussion subsequently arose
upon a motion proposed by Lord REDESDALE, to allow
certain electors of the borough—whose petition he had
presented at an earlier period of the sitting—to be heard
by counsel against the bill on its going into committee;
the Marquis of CLANRICARDE and Earl GREY objecting,
on the ground that there had already been sufficient
inquiry into the case, and that no new facts could
possibly be elicited. In the end, a division was taken; and
the motion was carried by 41 against 15 votes.

In the HOUSE OF COMMONS on Monday, March 29th,
Mr. Walpole, the Home Secretary, moved that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, himself, and the Secretary
at War, should prepare and bring in the bill to amend
and consolidate the laws respecting the Militia, for
which leave had already been given; and entered into
explanations of the reasons for the measure, and its
details. It was admitted, he supposed, that this country
ought to be, in its means of defence at least, placed upon
an equal footing with other countries, looking at the
elements of anarchy and confusion which might easily
break out not many months hence. It was true, our
friendly relations with other powers had increased and
were increasing; but this fact would show that we were
not influenced by jealousy or fear. The first question
was, were we in such a state of defence as a great country
like this ought to be in? The testimony of the first
military and naval authorities showed that it had not
sufficient provision against a sudden emergency. Steam
navigation exposed the country to more imminent peril
than at former periods; past governments had in times
of panic proposed measures similar to this; and the
house had already decided that something ought to be
done to put the country in a better state of defence.
There were, he observed, three classes of objectors to a
militia. One said, our defences were sufficient as they
were; but Mr. Walpole showed that while our army
was very little larger than that of Belgium
notwithstanding the dimensions of our empire, in case of a
sudden incursion not more than 25,000 men could be brought
to bear upon any one point; and that our ships in
commission at home consisted of only 9 of the line, 5
frigates, 1 sloop, and 17 steamers. Others said that
there was no immediate necessity for preparation; but
hasty preparations, while less perfect, would aggravate the
panic. The time of preparation and of action ought not
to be simultaneous. The third class of objectors urged
that we should increase our regular army. This would
add greatly to the permanent expense, and both army
and navy were instruments of attack as well as defence,
so that an augmentation of either would rouse suspicion
and provoke jealousy. The militia was a national
institution—a force familiar to the country; we had
actually at this moment a militia, for the law was only
suspended. The militia had, moreover, done good
service to the country, and, in assuming the character of
soldier, the militia-man did not renounce that of citizen.
After a short review of the history of the militia laws,
Mr. Walpole proceeded to develope the plan proposed by
the government—namely, first, to raise, if possible,
without abandoning the ballot, a force of 80,000 volunteers,
to be drilled and trained under the regulations of
the 43d George III.; 50,000 only to be raised the first
year, and 30,000 the second year, the period of service
to be five years. Secondly, it was proposed to raise
these men by bounties of £3 or £4, either to be paid
down at the time, or at the rate of 2s. or 2s. 6d. per
month, the volunteer being at liberty to take it in one
way or the other. Thirdly, with respect to the officers,
it was proposed to dispense with the qualifications
required by the 43d George III., in regard to all officers
below the rank of major, and generally to consider the
having been in the army equivalent to qualification.
Fourthly, the bill provided that the number of days'
training required in the year should be twenty-one, the
crown having the power to extend the period to seven
weeks, or to reduce it to three days. Lastly, with
respect to the embodiment of the men, it was not proposed
to make any alteration in the existing law. The expense
required for bounty and equipment would be about
£1,200,000; but if spread over five years, it would be
about £240,000 a-year; except that during the first year
the cost of equipment would raise the expense to £400,000,
including (as Mr. Walpole afterwards intimated) the
clothing. This being a national defence, it was intended
that the expense of the equipment, arms, and bounty
should, save in districts which should not provide the
proper quota, be borne by the public purse. Having
disposed of anticipated objections, Mr. Walpole
concluded by appealing to the house to accept this measure,
and thereby assist the government in accomplishing the
object of providing an effectual defence for the country
with as little interference as possible with the ordinary
habits and industry of the people; observing that, if it
were rejected, either from party motives or through an
overweening confidence in the assumed impregnability
of our insular position, the government would have the
satisfaction, at least, of knowing that they had
endeavoured to do their duty.—Mr. HUME, not objecting
to the introduction of the bill, condemned the policy of
the measure as unnecessary to the present time, when
this country was upon the most amicable terms with
other nations.—Sir DE LACY EVANS preferred an
addition to the regular force to a militia.—Mr. M. GIBSON
thought it would be better to defer this measure until
after an appeal should have been made to the country.
He would rather increase the regular army.—Lord
PALMERSTON said it was his intention to give this
measure every support in his power. An increase of
the regular army could not be maintained; and 8,000
regular troops would cost as much as the drilling
of these 80,000 men.—Lord J. RUSSELL, agreeing
that our means of defence should be increased,
thought the statement of Mr. Walpole, however explicit
in some parts, was less so in others, which, not being
agreeable to touch upon, he had seemed anxious to
avoid. If 80,000 volunteers were not obtained recourse
must be had to the ballot; how was that to be done,
and what were the classes to be subject to the ballot?
It would be most unjustifiable in him (Lord John) to
offer any obstacle to the introduction of this bill; at the
same time it was for the country to judge, and although
he should prefer a militia force to an increase of the
regular army, the country might entertain a repugnance
to it.—Mr. WALPOLE said, it was intended, if there should
not be a sufficient number of volunteers, to fall back
upon the ballot, which would extend from the ages of
eighteen to thirty-five.—Mr. COBDEN condemned the
measure in toto, as being wholly unnecessary, and
recommended that we should propose to the French to
lay up their ships in ordinary, reciprocally with ours,
ship for ship, instead of continuing our competition
of wasteful extravagance.—Mr. BERESFORD, Secre-
tary at War, and Admiral BERKELEY, supported
the Bill.—Mr. FOX MAULE objected to the details
of the measure. It went (he said) a great deal
farther than the measure of the late Government,
and was to all intents and purposes a revival of the
regular militia, with all which that implied, of long
service at a distance from home, and the necessary
destruction of the trade or profession of the recruit
unable to procure a substitute. Of course, one volunteer
would be worth many impressed men; but his
belief was, that they would get very few volunteers for
2s. 6d. per month, or 1d. a-day. Again, had Mr.
Walpole examined the confused machinery of the ballot
which he proposes to retain? If he had, he would have
found, that instead of assembling the force in ten weeks,
as the measure of the late Government would have