HC Deb 08 March 1844 vol 73 cc774-81
Captain Boldero,

in bringing forward the Ordnance Estimates, wished to offer a few words in explanation of the Votes he should propose. The fourth Vote was for the salaries of Barrack-masters at home and abroad. It was a Vote which from its nature could nut vary much from year to year, but there was a small diminution this year above the last of 168l. That would have been increased to 571l., but for the necessity of sending out a barrack establishment to China. The fifth Vote was for Ordnance works and repairs in the United Kingdom and Colonies, the building and repair of barracks, barrack-masters' expenditure and allowances, and other matters of the like nature, 624,615l. He admitted the expenditure was heavy under this head, but the great amount of the Vote arose from circumstances over which the Ordnance Department had no control. Last summer the West Indies had been visited by a severe earthquake, which had fallen particularly heavy on the island of Antigua, where buildings of every kind had been overthrown, and, among the rest, the Ordnance buildings. Similar circumstances had occurred in the island of Zante, where the military hospital had been destroyed. Then at the Cape of Good Hope a battery, standing on the sea shore, of very great importance, as it commanded Cape Town, had had one flank injured by the sea. Another unfortunate occurrence was the fire at Norwich barracks, one wing of which had been totally destroyed. This was the effect of mere accident; some children had been playing with lucifer matches, and, though it was in the middle of the day, a great part of the building was burnt down before the fire could be put a stop to. During last year, also, the Ordnance powder establishment at Waltham was much injured by an explosion, in consequence of which not only much property was destroyed, but, he regretted to say, seven lives were lost. The expense of adapting three or four houses to the purposes of the establishment had been estimated, and the necessary expenditure, he had ascertained by a visit, would, in all probability, be 8,000l. or 10,000l. At Chatham, the Medway had undermined a gun-wharf, which would render necessary an outlay of 6,000l. or 7,000l. Another of the extraordinary circumstances which rendered this vote necessary was the fire at the Tower, which consumed 60,000 square feet of flooring in the armoury there. Then all the military stores in Tooley-street had been removed a few years ago to the Tower, but in consequence of the fire additional storeroom became requisite—the stores could not be classified—they could not be properly preserved—they could not classify—a remedy for the evil was indispensable. It was proposed to pull down the Tower barracks which were in a dilapidated state, and to convert other parts of them into storehouses. On the highest ground within the Tower it was intended to construct barracks with the entire approbation of the Duke of Wellington. There was only one work more of any importance that was proposed for the ensuing year—viz. the construction of barracks in the Isle of France. They paid annually 5,000l. to keep those barracks in order. It was intended to convert 4,000l. of that sum to this purpose this year, which would reduce the expense of the building to 10,000l. The sixth Vote was for Military and Civil Contingencies, and in it was a large reduction of 64,000l. on last year's estimate, although an amount of 34,639l. had been transferred to the Ordnance by Treasury Minutes in the latter end of last year, which had formerly belonged to the Commissariat Department. On the tenth Vote, for Commissariat Supplies, on which there had been a great reduction, he would say with respect to the case of married officers, who lived out of barracks of their own free will, and not because there was not accommodation for them in the barracks—with regard to whom it had been made a matter of complaint, that they did not receive the same allowances of fuel and light, as those officers did who were obliged to live out of barracks when there was not room for them—that a decision (he was happy to state) had been arrived at which would afford another proof that the Duke of Wellington and the Master General of the Ordnance took an interest in all that was connected with the comfort of the officers in the service. In future no stores of any kind would be delivered without the barracks. It was intended to substitute a commuted allowance, and that all officers, whether their residence without the barracks was forced or voluntary, being married, should be put on the same footing. He would only add, that the reduction in the expense of the Ordnance Department since the present Government had come in was no less than 303,483l.

On the first Vote, that 127,043l. be granted to Her Majesty to defray the charge for Salaries to the Office of Ordnance,

Dr. Bowring

regretted that one general rule was not observed in drawing up the Public Estimates. He thought the Colonies ought to pay the expense of their own defence. The Ionian Islands were the only colonies which contributed from their public revenue for this object. He believed that if they put into the hands of the colonists a little more self-government they would be disposed to pay more of their own expenses.

Sir H. Douglas

said, he appealed for relief from this contribution in favour of an interesting and peculiar people, thrown back at this time of day, by the remarkable vicissitudes in their history, for regeneration, in their social, moral, and political condition, and to whom we had solemnly pledged a peculiar and paternal solicitude. Placed on the confines of civilisation, these interesting Islands presented a wide and noble field for improvement, when they came under the dominion of a Christian power. But it would ever be considered a stain in the history of Venice, and he must say in that of other Christian States, that whilst the Ionian Islands were used for maritime and military, and even for spiritual purposes, as the bulwarks of Christianity against the Infidels, no monument should have been raised, to commemorate the possession which the Venetian Government so long held, of those Islands, by any act which could show that, with real Christian spirit, they attended paternally to the moral and physical well-being of the people, and the general amelioration of those most interesting Islands. This was a duty which had devolved upon this great country. The glory and honour of our beloved Sovereign, the credit of the Government, the character of the country were at stake. We had under our protecting wing an interesting, a peculiar people, inhabiting a fair and classical region. All the sympathies and associations—classical, historical, ancient and modern, which we imbibed in our youth, and should carry with us to our graves—taught us to regard with deep interest, that peculiar people, whose destinies we hold in trust for good or for evil—for our glory, or to our shame. He should startle the House, shock the country, and wound the character of any British Government, were he to tell of the sacrifices and privations which were endured to enable the Ionian Government to liquidate the fixed tribute which they were bound to pay, and the manner and extent to which the exaction of this bond, retarded amelioration in the general condition of the Ionian Islands. [Lord Stanley here said, "It is done.] Done! when done? why was he not told of it? He appealed to the Committee whether he (Sir H. Douglas) having represented the case of the Ionian Islands, as now briefly stated, in 1838 to Lord Glenelg, in 1838 to Lord Normanby, and in 1839, 1840, and 1841, to Lord J. Russell, and in 1842 to his noble Friend the Secretary for the Colonies, Lord Stanley—having, too, on his request, not called for the production of Papers which, by an order of the last session, were forthcoming, he (Sir H. Douglas) appealed to the Committee, whether the noble Lord had treated him either as a supporter of Her Majesty's Government, or as a friend of the noble Lord's, as he ought to have done; and therefore, he (Sir H. Douglas) would go through the case he had in hand, without now heeding what the noble Lord had said. No one who was thoroughly acquainted with the Ionian Islands could, for a moment, doubt that the peculiar circumstances, and anomalous condition of those Islands, and the wants and necessities of the Ionian people, had not been considered as they ought to have been. Those Islands are not, as the hon. and learned Member for Bolton has inadvertently said, colonies. They are placed in a middle state, between the colonial and perfectly free independent state, without having, in some important respects, the advantages of either. Their productions are treated as foreign productions, although their ships are admitted to all the privileges of British vessels. An enormous duty, no less than 19½ per cent. is imposed on the export of those productions, to enable the Ionian Government to meet its obligations. That source of revenue has failed, by the diminution in price from about 74 dollars to about 18 per 1000 lbs., whilst the duty levied on the import of those productions into the United Kingdom, is upwards of 130 per cent on their prime cost. The progress of improvement of every description in the Ionian Islands is vastly retarded, and in some cases thrown back, by the exaction of this bond. The appropriations for public instruction are diminished; the public roads are falling into dilapidation and decay. There is no prison in Corfu; for want of that most essential institution, an old fort is used as a receptacle for offenders, convicts, and criminals of every age and description, without the possibility of classification or discipline. Lunatics were the inmates of prisons, associated with criminals and felons, for want of a lunatic asylum, until he (Sir H. Douglas) converted another old fort into a receptacle for those unhappy beings; and nothing has yet been done, from want of means, to provide a suitable building and establishment, in lieu of those temporary expedients. Every practicable exertion had been made by the Ionian Government to reduce the expenditure, and to increase the revenue, to enable the Ionian States to pay this enormous fixed tribute, and the other charges for British protection. He objected to this, not only in amount, but in principle. It was the worst of all principles to make the governed t he debtors of the government. He (Sir H. Douglas) must advert to another sad part of this case. To give effect to an act passed in the time of his predecessor, Lord Nugent, he (Sir H. Douglas) had insti- toted a poorhouse and house-of-industry at Corfu, for the reception of mendicants, so numerous in the Islands, and ether destitute persons. That establishment had been abolished, since his (Sir H. Douglas's) departure, although it contained three paupers upwards of ninety years of age, six upwards of eighty, and many other destitute persons, far advanced in life. He (Sir H. Douglas) did not mean to assert, that the noble Lord had expressly ordered this to be done; but he did mean to say, that the instructions to pay up the contribution—to insist upon our bond, were so stringent, as to render this, and other sacrifices necessary. On these grounds, he (Sir H. Douglas) would appeal to the Committee, to the Government, and to the country, for some abatement and mitigation of these rates and terms. He advised and implored Her Majesty's Government to extend relief to the Ionian Islands before it became too late. The present, certainly, were not times of danger, but times of danger might come; and it was, therefore, to be hoped that Ministers would adopt the course he recommended, as likely to prove most creditable to themselves, beneficial to the Ionian Islands, and which would ensure to this country, the everlasting gratitude of the Ionian people.

Mr. W. Williams

observed, that the Estimates of the present year were less by a sum of 9,000l. than those of last year, and that, at least, might be said to form a just ground of congratulation, even small as the amount of the saving was; for 9,000l. certainly was but a small sum compared with 1,800,000l. He regretted to see that more new barracks were to be built. Thus there was a sum of 117,000l. for new barracks at Manchester, and 26,000l. for new barracks at Newport, and there were to be new buildings at Liverpool, for the expense of which no sum was mentioned, but of course the buildings would cost something.

Captain Boldero

said, it had been thought desirable to enlarge certain docks at Liverpool, and that the use of a battery belonging to the Government was found necessary for that purpose. The parties interested in the docks proposed to take the battery from the Government, and build another in lieu of it, and thus the public would riot be put to any expense.

Captain Pechell

said, that as they were upon the subject of barracks, he should mention an outrage which had been committed by certain of the soldiers who were quartered at barracks in the town which he had the honour to represent. He should not say anything about the decision of the Court of Law to which the subject had been submitted, beyond observing, that the parties had been subjected to severe punishment. It would be in the recollection of the House, that when a statement was first made on the matter, it was intimated that the suffering parties would be recompensed by the comrades of the persons who had inflicted this grievous injury upon them. He understood that 50l. or 60l. would hardly repair the damage which had been done. The poor man who had been attacked had had his goods destroyed—his lodgers would no longer remain with him, and the injuries which he had received disabled him from the performance of his usual duties. It was said that recompense would be made, and that statement no doubt had its weight with the chairman of the Quarter Sessions when sentence was passed upon the parties accused. They had been sentenced to ten months' imprisonment and hard labour—that was a severe sentence, but the crime which they had committed was a great crime, and the parties injured were now severe sufferers. He hoped, that under these circumstances, something would be done for them.

Sir H. Hardinge

said, that several of the soldiers of the regiment in question had considered the conduct of their comrades in this case highly reprehensible, and had intended to raise a subscription with the view of compensating the injured parties. The attorney who had been employed by those parties had sought for and obtained a remedy by means of the Criminal Law. He pursued that sort of remedy to the utmost extent of the law; and now there was reason to believe, that three of the parties tried, found guilty, and sentenced, had nothing whatever to do with the riot. The House must see that no one could force the regiment to carry out their original intention of setting on foot a subscription.

Mr. Aglionby

was sorry to hear the right hon. and gallant Member say, that three of the parties were innocent. It was a statement calculated to do much injury. He hoped that neither that nor the conduct of the attorney would have the effect of preventing the soldiers doing what they in the first instance had intended.

Sir H. Hardinge

replied, that the attor- ney had conducted himself towards the commanding officer in a very offensive manner, and that his conduct was most improper; but he never meant to say that those circumstances would at all influence the conduct of the regiment towards the parties injured.

Mr. Aglionby

would thus appeal to the regiment from his place in Parliament on behalf of men who were foreigners, who knew nothing of the laws of this country, and who placed their case in the hands of an attorney, who took proceedings under the Criminal Law. It was his opinion, that the officers, for the sake of the character of the regiment, ought to join in the subscription, and fully compensate the suffering parties.

Vote agreed to, as were several other Votes.

House resumed.

House adjourned at twenty minutes past eleven o'clock.