ARMY ESTIMATES. (Hansard, 5 March 1822)

§ Mr. Hume
said, that having last night endeavoured, but in vain, to persuade the committee to reduce the number of men for the service of the year, he now wished to put upon record the opinion which he entertained regarding the large amount of the present standing army. He was not anxious to prevent troops from being sent to Ireland to put an end to the disturbances which existed there: quite the contrary; he wished those disturbances to be put down with all speed, whatever might be the of original causes of them. The only difference which existed between himself and the members of his majesty's government was, that he thought that there were already in Ireland troops enough to effect that object. The way he made that assertion out was this. By the estimates that had been presented to the House, it appeared that in Ireland there were 18,397 men, and that in England, including reliefs, there were 22,462 men, making a total of 40,859 men. There were also three veteran battalions, which increased that total to 43,550 men. Now he contended, that such a number of men, exclusive of the assistance to be derived from the artillery, who amounted to 7,000 men, from the marines, who amounted to 8,000 men, anti from the troops in the colonies, exclusive of the East Indies, who amounted to 27,943 men more, was more than sufficient to quell the disturbances now raging in Ireland. The noble lord in his statement had omitted to take any notice of the artillery, marines, and veteran battalions, and had stated the amount of the forces at home and in the colonies at 68,802 men. Now he maintained, upon the declaration of the noble marquis opposite, that as the marines were performing the duty of regular soldiers in the Mediterranean, and the veteran battalions the same at home, they ought to be included, in future, with the artillery in the account of the regular army; and, in that case, the military 921 force of the country would amount to 86,493 men, instead of of 68,802 men, as stated by the noble lord. From that number he wished to take 10,000 men. That was the extent of the proposition he had made, and for making it he had been taunted with inconsistency by hon. gentlemen opposite. He maintained that, upon the necessity of reducing the army, he had always been consistent. The noble marquis opposite had said, that any saving, however small, that could be made without detriment to the public service, ought to be made without delay. Now, he had kept that declaration of the noble marquis continually in his view; and, upon seeing that the expenses of the army in the year 1822 amounted to between seven and eight millions, whilst in the year 1792 they did not amount to more than 2,331,149l., he had become convinced that the difference of expenditure in the two years was greater than ought to be permitted, He had therefore proposed a reduction of 10,000 men, by which a saving of half a million would he gained to the country. The hon. gentleman who was under-secretary for the colonial department had called the saving which he had proposed a petty, paltry saving, and had implored the House upon that account to reject it with disdain. He did not know whether the being a few weeks in office had produced such an effect upon the hon. gentleman as to make him conceive the saving of half a million a petty, paltry saving; but he did know this, that the hon. gentleman had told the House, that the hon. member for Aberdeen, in his petty, paltry public savings, wished to sacrifice the honour and safety of the country. Now, he trusted that no proposition which he had ever made was deserving of the disdain of the House. Indeed, he thought that the term "disdain" was an improper term for one member of parliament to use towards another: and if it were used for the purpose of deterring him from examining the financial arrangements of the country, he treated it with that contempt which he trusted he should always treat such propositions as talked of half a million being a petty, paltry saving. Having said thus much to the hon. under-secretary, he must now express a hope that the gallant general, the member for Liverpool, was in his place, as he had a word or two to say to him regarding the insinuation which he had thrown out against his (Mr. Hume's) 922 profession. My profession, Continued Mr. Hume, is as well known as that of the gallant general; and if I were to ask him, what part of his professional conduct got him the regiment which he now has the honour to command, he would perhaps find more difficulty in answering the question than I should, were he to ask me to what measures my success in life was chiefly owing. [Loud cheers from the ministerial benches.] Hon. gentlemen may cheer as much as they please; but when allusions are made to the private history of any member, it is done for some mean, improper purpose, and not from a sense of public duty.—He was sorry to say that there were several gentlemen on his side of the House, who viewed a standing army with as much delicacy as the gentlemen opposite, and who were inclined to look upon it as the best protector of our rights and liberties. He would, however, ask those gentlemen whether, if 53,000 men were a sufficient force for the country in 1792, 76,000 men were not sufficient in 1822? He had said nothing of the considerable increase which had taken place since the former period, in the number of our militia regiments, and our volunteer and yeomanry corps. After this statement, he thought he had said enough to convince the House, that 76,493 men would be sufficient for the service of the year. He would not dictate to ministers. He would merely take from them 10,000 men, and leave them to decide from what force they were to be taken. He should now move an amendment, by leaving out "68,802," and inserting "58,802" instead thereof.

§ Mr. Wilmot
thought, that the hon. member for Aberdeen would have done better if he had made the speech with which he had that evening favoured the House, on a former evening in the committee, and when the hon. member for Liverpool was present to repel the attack which had been made upon him. He begged leave most distinctly to assert, that he had never made use of the expressions "petty, paltry savings," whatever might appear to the contrary in those historical fragments of the day of which they had recently heard so much. Neither had he said that the proposition of the hon. member ought to be rejected with disdain. He would show the House, by a repetition of what he did say, that he could not have used any such language. The hon. member for Aberdeen had said, 923 that the reduction effected in the colonies did not exceed 400 men. Now, he, (Mr. W.) had shown, that the forces in the colonies last year amounted to 32,467, and in the present year to 27,913, which proved a reduction of from 4 to 5,000 men. He had then said, that if the hon. member took no more care in his other financial assertions than he had done in that which he had exposed, he should feel it right to reject his propositions in future with disdain.

§ Mr. Hume
explained how the mistake, which he allowed he had made respecting the amount of the reductions in the forces of the colonies, had arisen. It was from having found the forces differently stated in two different papers: in the one, they were only stated rank and file; in the other, their officers were also included. He assured the 0House that he never made any statement without deliberation.