HC Deb 07 March 1859 vol 152 cc1408-15

(5.) £185,594, Departments of Secretary of State for War and General Commanding in Chief.

Vote agreed to; as were also the following two Votes:—

(6.) £359,040, Manufacturing Departments, Military Storekeepers, &c.

(7.) £626,153, Wages of Artificers, Labourers &c.

(8.) 1,003,604, Provisions, Forage, &c.

SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY

suggested, that the Vote should be divided into two, in accordance with the recommendation of the Board of Audit.

GENERAL PEEL

said, that the suggestion of the hon. Baronet would be taken into consideration.

Vote agreed, to.

(9.) £718,088, Warlike Stores.

MR. MACARTNEY

asked whether the Minister for War could state the amount of iron ordnance which the gun factory at Woolwich was able to turn out in the year.

GENERAL PEEL

assured the hon. Member that nothing could he going on more satisfactorily than the gun factory at Woolwich, and he should have much pleasure in presenting a Return of all the guns manufactured there during the past year.

SIR CHARLES NAPIER

inquired how many Armstrong guns were ready for delivery.

GENERAL PEEL

replied, that very few were ready for delivery, but a considerable number were in process of manufacture. Machinery was being prepared for turning out as many as possible during the next year, and the Government were establishing a factory at Woolwich as well as in the north.

MR. R. N. PHILIPS

asked whether it was intended to vote any money for Mr. Whitworth.

GENERAL PEEL

replied that the Whitworth gun was tried at the same time and by the same Committee as the Armstrong. There was certainly some defect in it then, for it burst; but he believed that Mr. Whitworth had made some improvements in it since. That gentleman had requested that his invention should again be submitted to the Committee, and it would assuredly have a fair trial.

GENERAL CODRINGTON

observed that it was greatly to the credit of Mr. Whitworth that he had given his time and talent for the benefit of the country without remuneration, while he was acknowledged as one of the most eminent mechanicians of this country. He had not only given his attention to the subject, but had attended to see the experiments carried on. It was highly important that the closest attention should be devoted to the perfecting of small arms; and the Enfield rifle should be tried with the Whitworth rifle, and the closest observations made as to their range and penetration—for the latter was as important as the former, and he hoped the result would be laid before the House and the country. He repeated that Mr. Whitworth deserved the highest praise for the efforts he had made to improve fire arms in this country.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

wished to have an explanation of the item of £400,000 which stood in the Vote in connection with the name of the East India Company.

GENERAL PEEL

stated that the sum in question was due by the East India Company for stores furnished during the present year; but, as it would not be paid till the next financial year, it was necessary to cover it with a Vote now.

Vote agreed to.

(10.) £325,072, Fortifications.

MR. MONSELL

asked the Secretary for War whether it was intended to proceed with the fortifications now in course of construction, since the invention of improved weapons must materially affect many of those in existence? During the Russian war they had no guns that would carry more than 4500 yards; whereas if they had had this gun they might have been able to attack Cronstadt. The Armstrong gun would make a change in the whole system of fortifications. He should be glad to know if it was the intention to proceed with the construction of any new fortifications, or to spend any money upon them at all until the probable effects of Armstrong's upon the present system of fortifications had been ascertained.

SIR FREDERICK SMITH

said, he had no doubt whatever that the penetration of a shot fired from Armstrong's gun would be much more considerable than that of the old ordnance; but that fact would simply involve this alteration—that, whereas we had hitherto been satisfied with a parapet eighteen feet in thickness, in future we should have to make the parapet of twenty feet or twenty-two feet in thickness. But there were other questions involved. When the works for the defence of Portsmouth were designed it was understood that the works were to be advanced, in order to prevent an enemy from making a lodgment and bombarding the place. It was clear that the radius which was sufficient then was insufficient now, and the question arose whether it ought not to be extended.

LORD PALMERSTON

said, there could be no doubt that the general adoption of Sir William Armstrong's guns would cause an alteration in warfare both by land and sea, and that when their use became general great changes might be required in the system of defensive works. But meanwhile he trusted that the Government would not suspend those works for the immediate defence of Portsmouth and Plymouth which had been thought necessary. Sir William Armstrong's guns were not yet in use, while here were works essential for the defence of our dockyards against existing ordnance. It would be bad policy to leave these works unfinished until the enemy, whoever he might be, should come. Let us then make these places secure against the ordnance which was at present in use; and if hereafter weapons of greater range should come into use, we should then have to consider whether works still further in advance might or might not be necessary. There was no question that the works now in progress were absolutely necessary for the defence of our dockyards in the present state of the science of gunnery.

SIR C. NAPIER

asked for an explanation of the expenditure upon new fortifications at Dover.

GENERAL PEEL

said, the first thing he did when the merits of Sir W. Armstrong's gun were reported to him was to appoint a Committee, including some naval officers, to consider what effect this gun would have upon the system of fortifications. Experiments were now going on upon this subject with regard both to masonry and fieldworks, but at present it was hardly possible to calculate to what extent. Sir W. Armstrong's gun would affect fortifications. The largest gun hitherto made upon Sir W. Armstrong's plan was a 32-pounder, but Sir W. Armstrong proposed to make cannons of much larger calibre, longer range, and greater weight of projectile. He agreed with the noble Lord that it would not be advisable to stop our fortifications and leave Portsmouth and Plymouth undefended until the Committee should report. At Dovor the works going on for a harbour of refuge rendered necessary some fortifications to prevent the possibility of any foreign fleet coming in.

SIR CHARLES NAPIER

said, that in former days nothing was heard of fortifications, but people looked to the fleet as the proper defence of the country; and he believed that if the money that we were now spending for this purpose were laid out in building and fitting out ships, we should not now require fortifications on shore.

Vote agreed to.

(11.) £212,507, Civil Buildings.

MR. MACARTNEY

asked if the Pimlico stores were for the supply of clothing to the army in addition to the Tower stores?

GENERAL PEEL

said, that the establishment at Pimlico was intended for the depôt of stores hitherto kept at Weedon. The clothing would also be inspected here, and when the buildings were completed a portion of the stores now kept in the Tower would be removed to Pimlico.

COLONEL KNOX

inquired if the store at Weedon was to be closed altogether?

GENERAL PEEL

said, the establishment at Weedon would continue to be a depôt of arms for the centre of England.

Vote agreed to.

(12.) £797,122, Barracks.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

took exception to the increase—exceeding £118,000—in it over that of the previous year, remarking at the same time that he did not object to any expenditure on barrack accommodation calculated to preserve the health and comfort of the army.

GENERAL CODRINGTON

remarked that, although it had been stated on high sanitary authority that there should not be less than 1,000 cubic feet of air per man, in many of the barracks of England there was only 300 cubic feet per man.

MR. COWAN

called attention to the great irritation caused by the system of billeting in Scotland. In the city which he represented, so far from the troops being billeted on the publicans generally, the burden fell on only a few of them. He wished to know whether it was intended to do away with billeting soldiers, except when they were actually on the march, or to increase the remuneration for billets. He thought that the atrocious system which now existed should be done away with as far as possible.

SIR FREDERICK SMITH

said, that in the construction of barracks the lowest tender was always taken, and not a shilling was unnecessarily expended.

GENERAL PEEL

said, in answer to the objections of the hon. Member for Lambeth, he had put this Vote at the lowest possible sum. There was certainly a great increase in it over that of last year; but it had become absolutely necessary to provide increased barrack accommodation, especially in London, and at Glasgow and Nottingham. With regard to billeting, it was impossible for him to make any alteration in the remuneration until the mutiny Bill was brought in; but in that Bill the rate of remuneration would be increased.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, that his complaint was, that a very large sum of money was spent in inefficient barracks, not suited for the proper accommodation of the soldiers, or for the preservation of their health.

GENERAL CODRINGTON

observed that the Report of the Commission was to the effect, that the men were crowded in the rooms, and that there was great mortality, particularly among the Guards, arising from the overcrowding of the rooms.

MR. SIDNEY HERBERT

thought, that in discussing this question, hon. Gentlemen forgot that there were now quartered in England many more troops than there were a few years ago. It was quite true that there was a great deal of over-crowding in the barracks. If they could get sites large enough he thought that they ought not to build barracks at all, for huts were cheaper and better; but such a suggestion could not apply to London, where the cost of sites was so very great, and buildings of masonry two or three stories in height must be constructed. He wished to ask what was the prospect of Netley Hospital being finished. The Commission on which he served reported strongly against the site of that building, and also the construction of the building; but his right hon. Friend found a number of learned men who said it was too late to give up the building. He thought that they should take warning not to construct on a plan so unnecessarily expensive. It was a theory among army medical officers, that invalid soldiers could only be accommodated in small wards. That was not the case in civil hospitals. When they put men into small wards, the cost of administation and attendance was almost double. That appeared to him to be extravagance. The site of Netley had now been settled, and he did not wish to reopen the matter, but he wished to know when the hospital would be fit to receive patients.

GENERAL PEEL

said, it was stated in the Estimates what amount would be required to finish the building. As to the medical men appointed to report on the site, he thought that his right hon. Friend had not dealt fairly with them. The right hon. Gentleman had himself named half of them.

MR. SIDNEY HERBERT

said, his right hon. Friend had proposed to him a list of names, and he objected to some of them, and some of his objections were acquiesced in; but he did not then know the question to be put. The question put was not whether the place was unhealthy, but whether £120,000 having been expended, the place was so unhealthy that it should be given up, Those coming home as invalids should be located in the most dry, bracing, and airy situation, and they found a site which was within a few yards of a river bank.

MR. JOSEPH LOCKE

observed, that no doubt there was every disposition that due care and attention should be bestowed on proper barrack accommodation for the soldier; but he complained of the want of sufficient care in preparing the estimates for barracks and hospitals. The House had one estimate on one day and another on the next, and the House did not know what would be the expense until the money was all expended. There had been an additional sum of about £100,000 expended in Netley Hospital, to remedy the defect in site.

SIR FREDERICK SMITH

explained, that there were two plans, one larger than the other.

MR. JOSEPH LOCKE

believed, that the original estimate was for a place to accommodate 1,000 men, and now it was not intended to accommodate more.

SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY

did not think the house was fairly treated in the estimates for barracks. The amount of money expended was perfectly incredible, and the public could not understand how it was that the soldier was not properly accommodated. There was a new demand for Aldershot in the Estimates, and there seemed to be somewhere a total want of care in preparing the Estimates. He wished to know whether this new sum of £66,000 addded to the £574,000 already voted, would really complete the barracks?

SIR FREDERICK SMITH

said, only £474,000 had been expended.

GENERAL PEEL

said, he could promise that this would be the last sum asked for these barracks. They had engaged to pay the contractors £9,000 per month during the winter, and £15,000 during the summer, and had insisted that the whole amount should be inserted in this year's Estimate, and no better or cheaper barracks could be built, and they would accommodate 247 officers, 6,409 men, and 1,900 horses.

Vote agreed to. as was also,

(45.) £268,532, Educational and Scientific Branches.

House resumed. Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.

House adjourned at half after Twelve o'clock.