HC Deb 17 March 1824 vol 10 cc1209-15
Mr. Hume

referred to what had passed on two former evenings respecting the Stock Purse of the Regiments of Foot Guards, when a statement made by the Noble Secretary at War had been contradicted by various officers. He had however some reason to doubt the correctness of the information from which those hon. officers spoke, and for this reason he again brought the subject forward. He then stated the mode in which he supposed the stock purse was formed. Mr. Windham had endeavoured to effect an alteration in the manner in which the accounts of the Guards, or household troops, were kept, but without effect; but the present noble secretary at War had corrected, as he understood, many irregularities in the management of the stock-purse. The principle of the question was of the greatest importance. The House voted certain sums for the pay and support of the army, and for the Guards as a part of the army; and it had a right to be informed what was done with that money. The household troops were in some respects peculiarly circumstanced; as a sum in the gross was voted for them, while for the other regiments of the line it was voted in detail. The Guards had a stock-purse, which arose principally from the pay of a certain number of men borne on the list, but non-effective: he believed that there were eight men to each company so circumstanced—men only upon paper, and for the five regiments of guards the number would be 464 men, at 13d. per day. The pay of these men was thrown into the stock-purse, and out of it the expenses of the hospital and recruiting service were discharged. He had been told, that the regiments of Guards were more economical than those of the line. This might be, but still, though the money might be properly spent, the House had a right to inquire into the expenditure. He made it a distinct charge, that irregularity did exist, and he knew that in so doing, he was open to the often-repeated slanders, and to be told, as he had been on a former night by an hon. officer, that he had been imposed upon by the malicious misrepresentations of some libellous informer impeaching his comrades. He would, however, state in what way he had obtained his information on this subject, that the House might judge. Two individuals in the Guards had come to him last year, and had asked him if he was aware of the prevalence of a practice in the Guards, different from other regiments, as to the proportion of pay of men confined. He had replied in the negative; they went on to say, that be ought to know. Though it was not carried to any great extent, that the money-stopped from the men went to the officers. If this were so, he felt that it was wrong; and, as there ought not to be even the appearance of secrecy on such a subject, he had determined to inquire into the fact. He had, therefore, taken occasion to ask one or two officers what the stock-purse of the Guards was; and their answer was, that it was some fund managed by the captains, with which the subalterns had nothing to do. In order that he might not bring the subject forward, without sufficient grounds, he had gone to an officer of the Guards, stating that he had heard such and such assertions made and inquiring it they were founded in fact. He had asked first, whether there was a stock-purse? The reply was, that there was. Are the stoppages of pay from men under confinement put into it? was his next question; and the answer was in the affirmative. What, then, became of the 7½d per day; did it go back to the public from the stock-purse, or was it permanently added to the funds of that stock-purse? The officer admitted that he believed it did not go back to the public. He had since understood, that the surplus of the stock-purse, after the charges upon it were paid, was divided between the captains and the field officers. This subject therefore, merited investigation; for no account of any regiment ought to be closed from the investigation of the Secretary at War. The public confided the subject to him, and he was responsible for the misapplication of any of the money of the public. It was not a sufficient answer for the officers to say, "We in the Guards do not proceed like other regiments; we do all by contract; we have a certain sum, for which we undertake to do certain things, and you have no right to know how it is spent." What he wished to know, in the first place, was, whether there was such a fund as the Stock-Purse? He did not suppose that that would be disputed; it was, indeed, admitted on all hands. Then he inquired, from what sources was it supplied? If it arose from ineffective men, only borne on paper, and not existing in fact, he begged to be informed, whether these 464 men were part of the number annually voted? If so, then so far it was needless; and the people ought not to be called upon to pay for men, that the money might be put into the stock-purse of the Guards. He had thought, from what had passed of late years, that none but efficient men were included in the votes, and that paper men were totally unknown in the army at present. He was satisfied that it would redound much more to the credit of the Guards if this subject were left quite open to inspection. At present, certain notions prevailed among the men regarding it. They might be erroneous; but the good of the service required that the men should be convinced that they were mistaken. What he asked for, was by no means unreasonable. If the noble Secretary at War was ignorant of any facts touching this stock-purse, it would be advantageous, in that point of view, that the question should be brought forward and discussed. The hon. gentleman concluded by moving, "That there be laid before the House, a return of the number of men confined under sentence of Courts Martial, general or regimental, or by the civil power, in each battalion of the Foot Guards, in each year since January 1816, together with the periods of their confinement: also an account of the amount of pay stopped from these men in each year, and to what purpose applied: also, an account of the income of the stock-purse and the contingent account of each of the regiments of Foot Guards, from what source derived, and how the same has been applied and appropriated in each year since January 1816."

Lord Palmerston

thought he should be able in a few words fully to explain all that had puzzled the hon. member for Aberdeen. Previously to the year 1783, all the regiments of the service were on the same footing as the Guards at present. Pay was issued for the full number of men voted, and the difference between the pay issued to the establishment and the effective numbers, in other words, the pay of the ineffectives went to form a stock-purse, the mysterious term which had so confused the hon. mover. Out of this stock-purse were paid the expenses of recruiting, of hospitals; and the remainder, if any, was divided among the captains of companies. When Mr. Burke brought in his bill which abolished the stock-purses in the regiments of the line, and provided that pay should be issued for the effectives only, the Foot guards were excepted from the arrangement. The hon. member had said, that Mr. Windham as well as himself (lord P.) had wished to extend the system of the rest of the army to the Guards. What was Mr. Windham's wish, he knew not; but as to his own intention the hon. gentleman was misinformed. Each system had its peculiar advantages, and from the fixed head-quarters of the Guards, and other circumstances, he believed that the stock-purse arrangement was as economical as that which prevailed in the regiments of the line. As to the pay stopped from soldiers in confinement, it was known to the hon. gentleman, that, under the mutiny act, the pay of men confined under sentences of court martial was sacrificed; but it was not provided to whom that pay should be given. Undoubtedly, the pay so forfeited was, legitimately, a part of the stock-purse, because it formed a part of the difference between the establishment and effectives pay, in the same manner as the j pay of those who had died or deserted. On inquiry into the subject, he found a diversity of practice existed in the different regiments of Guards. It was to be observed that according to the mutiny act, there was a power in the secretary at war, to remit to the men who had been so confined, the whole or any part of their pay. In the regiments of Guards three different practices prevailed. In some cases, the officers commanding regiments exercised the discretion which, according to law, should strictly be vested in the secretary at war, of remitting, to the persons who had been confined, the whole, or any part of their pay. In other cases, credit was given to the public in the regimental accounts; in other cases, the money was left in the hands of the agent of the regiment, ready to be paid to the paymaster-general if it should be soclaimed by him. But, in no one case, was any part of the money so stopped from persons confined under sentences of courts martial, divided among the officers; though, as legally forming a part of the stock-purse, they would have been entitled so to have divided it. After what he had stated, it was impossible that the supposition could exist, for an instant, that such a body of men as the officers of the Guards would pervert the course of justice, from the miserable motive of adding to their dividends a few shillings from the forfeited pay of the men imprisoned. Really, the amount that would have accrued to them in this way was so small, that to each officer it would have been counted in shillings; but, as it would be more satisfactory to the feelings of the officers of the Guards to clear themselves of all suspicion of being operated on by such motives, he should consent to so much of the motion as called for an account of the amount of pay forfeited by the soldiers of the Guards imprisoned under courts-martial, and the manner in which it had been disposed of; the result of which would be, to shew, that in no instance had it been divided among the officers, though legally, the captains were entitled to it. And he was authorised to say, that though this pay was a legitimate part of the stock-purse, and should be applied to defray the expenses of the hospital and regimental contingencies, yet that the officers of the Guards were perfectly willing that, in all cases, it should go to the public; except in the instances where it was deemed proper to remit it to the men under sentence. As to the amount and application of the stock-purse, the accounts moved for would be extremely bulky and not at all instructive. All the information that was necessary on the subject was before the House. He would therefore move, as an amendment, to leave out all the words after the word "Return," in order to add the words, "Shewing the amount of pay forfeited under the provisions of the mutiny act, by men of each regiment of the Foot-guards, imprisoned by sentence of court-martial, in each year since 1816, and stating how the same has been disposed of," instead thereof.

Mr. Bernal

stated, that the explanation given by the noble lord must be as satisfactory to the House as it was creditable to the regiments of Guards. Nor did he think the gallant officer opposite him had any occasion to be dissatisfied with the statement of his hon. friend, who had brought the matter forward.

Sir H. Hardinge

said, that if the hon. member had made the other night a statement similar to that which he had now made, he should not have expressed himself with any warmth; but certainly the imputation that the officers of the Guards put into their own pockets the pay of the imprisoned men, was one which he felt it necessary to repel. The allowances of the officers in the Guards were far from being extravagant, as compared with those of the rest of the army. He was ready to show the hon. gentleman the accounts, by which he would see, that the expense of the officers of a battalion of the Guards was 700l. less than that of a battalion of the line.

Colonel Dawkins

said, he thought it unnecessary to add any thing to the explanation of the noble lord, which had proved so satisfactory.

Sir J. Shelley

said, the Guards would be found as little expensive in reality, as any branch of the army.

Mr. Hume

expressed himself satisfied with the explanation given, and observed, that he could not have been expected to know what was the manner in which the money was disposed of, as the noble lord had only known it by inquiring, since the subject had been mentioned in that House.

The motion, as amended, was agreed to.