§ Sir H. Hardingemoved that 126,000l. be granted for the pay of General Officers, not colonels, for the year 1830.
Mr. Maberlywished to direct the attention of the Committee to the annually-increasing amount of the present estimate. The whole amount of pensions, superannuations, and allowances of this description in 1827 was 5,456,000l., being for the army alone, in that year, 3,023,000l. In 1810, however, it was only 687,000l.; and in 1817, 2,195,000l. This showed the rapid manner in which this charge was increasing. The same increase took place in the naval and in the civil departments. The subject had occupied much attention in the Finance Committee, and an hon. relative of his being a military man, had made a report on the subject to the Commander-in chief; according to which it appeared practicable to save about 300,000l. a year. Since then the right hon. and gallant Secretary had turned his attention to the subject, and but for him the amount would have been much greater. He had great pleasure in bearing his testimony to the great ability and indefatigable zeal of the gallant officer in putting a stop to the alarming increase of the dead weight of the Army. The thanks of the country were due to him for his endeavours to check the amount of this estimate,—one, indeed, which it was more difficult to reduce, for many reasons, than perhaps any other in the army department.
§ The next Resolution was for 36,669l. 7s. 8d. for defraying the expenses of Garrisons, at home and abroad, for the year 1830.
§ Mr. Humethought, that this grant really deserved more consideration than he had ever been able to obtain for it. A great part of this vote went to support military sinecures. No sooner was one governor dead than another was appointed in his 1356 place, though no duty was to be done. It was not his wish to object to any grant that was really necessary for the defence of our garrisons. He had no wish, he said, to deprive the Government of the means of providing for old officers; but it was really too much to have governors, for instance, for such places as Carrickfergus. These situations, too, were not always given to meritorious officers, but to persons of a different description. He saw a long list of governors, lieutenant-governors, and majors without any duties to perform, and those persons who were thus pensioned were by no means the most deserving. He had no desire to interfere with existing appointments, but prospectively important savings might be obtained by a revision and alteration of the prevailing system.
§ Sir H. Hardingereplied, that all these offices and appointments stood on a peculiar basis; namely, that of being the only means in the hands of the Crown for the remuneration of old officers. He readily admitted that they were military sinecures; but, when he stated how few they were, they amounting only to seventy, compared to the list of 13,000 officers on full and half-pay, whose services they might be bestowed to reward, he thought it would be ungracious indeed to deprive the Crown of this mode of repaying old, and faithful, and disabled officers. He would add, that the greater number of these offices did not give the holders of them above 200l. a year, and therefore they were not such large rewards as the hon. Member seemed to intimate.
§ Mr. Sadlerthought, that naval officers should have a similar provision, or at least that they should participate in the like retiring bounty.
Mr. Maberlythought that, on the whole, British officers were worse paid than those of any other European army: still upon principle he objected to this mode of remuneration by sinecures.
§ Resolution agreed to.
§ Mr. Humecomplained of the form in which these accounts were made out. Why not put some of these items of expenditure upon the head of effective service, instead of making them up under colonial accounts? These colonies ought to be made to supply this expenditure, instead of palming upon Great Britain the payment of their governors, lieutenant-governors, town-majors, &c.
§ Sir H. Hardingeassured the hon. Mem- 1357 ber that the Government were taking every means of economizing in this department of the public service, and making the colonies as available as possible in this respect.
§ The Resolution for 104,000l., the full-pay of retired officers, was agreed to without any conversation.
§ On that of 720,859l. 12s. l0d. for half-pay and military allowances,
§ Mr. Humeobjected, and complained; that the Government had not reduced this list, by filling up commissions from it as vacancies enabled them, instead of saddling the country with new pensioners. In 1818 this vote was 661,000l.; and in 1822, instead of having decreased, it had increased. Had the Government filled up vacancies as they occurred with officers from half-pay, good soldiers would have been employed, the country would have had the services of veterans, not of boys, and the half-pay list might have been reduced one half. That was the policy pursued by the great Duke of Marlborough, who wrote to the Secretary of War in 1715 as follows, and he would quote the letter for the benefit of the Duke of Wellington, hoping that he would follow the example of his illustrious predecessor:—
Sir;—His Majesty being determined to provide as soon as possible for the broken officers, as well as those who are upon half-pay, with intent to ease the nation in time of the burthen thereof, as to reward the particular merit of those officers who have distinguished themselves during the course of the late war by their services, I am commanded to signify to you his pleasure, that as any commission shall happen hereafter to become vacant in the army, of what degree soever it be, the same shall always be filled up with a half-pay officer; and that for the future no person through favour, interest, or any other practices, may unjustly obtain a commission to which he has no right, in prejudice of another officer older than himself. It is his Majesty's pleasure, that the first regard shall always be had to the seniority of the commission, provided his Majesty shall have good reason to be satisfied of the character and merit of the person, and of his zeal and fidelity for his service: still observing, that a reduced officer of the same rank in the regiment where such vacancy happens, is to be preferred before all others. This his Majesty's pleasure you have to cause to be entered in the books of your office as a standing rule and direction in this behalf.—I am, Sir, your obedient humble servant,MARLBOROUGH.June 30th, 1715.To the Secretary-at-war.1358It is his Majesty's pleasure, that all colonels, now and late in the army, do certify to me the date of each officer's commission reduced out of their respective regiments, to the intent that all officers so reduced may be provided for according to his Majesty's pleasure, signified to me as above by his grace the Duke of Marlborough; and the said colonels are hereby required to send such certificates as soon as possible.(Signed) W. PULTENEY.An order recommended by such high authority, was, he presumed, still enrolled at the War-office. The Letter was published in the Gazette, in July, 1715. He did not know that it had ever been repealed; and if it were not, he did not know why it was not acted on. There was, moreover, a Resolution of the House of Commons, agreed to nem. con. on the motion of Mr. Sandys on Dec. 12, 1740, precisely to the same effect. He would read it, however, to satisfy hon. Members:—" Dec. 12, 1740, resolved, nem. con. on the motion of Mr. Sandys, that an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, that for the present and future ease of his Majesty's subjects, he would be graciously pleased to employ in his armies such persons as now remain upon half-pay who are qualified to serve his Majesty." Being unaware that either the War-office order of 1715, or this Resolution of 1740, had been revoked, he was at a loss to know why they were not both acted upon. He was also desirous of knowing what steps had been taken to buy up the half-pay of certain officers, according to the existing regulation. In making these remarks, he begged not to be understood as being unwilling to do full justice to the right hon. Secretary's exertions, which were, he knew, very beneficial and meritorious; the extravagance of which he complained lay at the door of his predecessors in office.
§ Sir H. Hardinge, in reply to Mr. Hume, said, that the hon. Member complained of Government having given away new commissions, instead of filling up vacancies by appointing officers from half-pay, contrary to the recommendation of the Finance Committee; but no such commissions had been given away, neither was it the case that individuals who had received first commissions since the peace had been put upon half-pay. It was not possible by the Act of Parliament to create new half-pay. As to the hon. Member's second question, he believed that about 1359 one hundred and twenty commissions had been bought up and cancelled, and that a saving had been effected for the public of about 125 per cent on the whole sum cancelled. As to the observation of the hon. Member regarding the never appointing any persons to the army but officers on half-pay, he must remind him that our army now was in a very different condition from what it was in the time of the Duke of Marlborough. At that time we had only two colonies; now we had a great number, and it would be very hard on officers serving abroad if they were not to receive promotion. Great injury, he believed, would be done to the service by giving all commissions to officers on half-pay, though that principle was acted on as far as possible. In 1815 the number of officers on full and half-pay was 18,405, and now there were only 14,910, making a reduction of 3,595 since the peace. As large reductions had been made as possible, though they were not perceptible on account of many of the casualties on the half-pay list having been absorbed by placing people on it from full-pay. The actual amount of the sum which had fallen in was 38,000l. though the estimates showed only 18,000l. He must say, also, that a great part of the reduction he had mentioned of 3,595 officers, was due, not to him, but to the noble Lord who preceded him.
§ Mr. Humesaid, that he understood the right hon. Gentleman's remark applied to the troops of the line; but had there not been, at the same time, new commissions given in the Guards and Household Troops?
§ Sir H. Hardingesaid, that there had been a reduction of certain companies in these troops, although, of course, some fresh ensigns must have been appointed since the peace.
§ Mr. Moncksaid, he could not understand why our army should not be governed on the same principles as the armies of the continental states. In the French army there was no half-pay or pensions, except for wounds or being disabled in the service. Quarter-pay, not half-pay, was the reward for mere service. Though those armies had not the large pay and emoluments of our troops, they were not less efficient.
Mr. Maberlyreminded his hon. friend, that the British officers purchase their commissions, which the officers of none of the continental armies did.
§ Sir H. Hardingeacknowledged the justice of the remark, and added, that, in future, half-pay was in fact to be given contingent on a certain period of service on full-pay.
Some further conversation ensued between Mr. Monck, Mr. Hume, and Sir H. Hardinge, to ascertain how far the amount for any new commissions sold had been rendered available in reduction of the military expenditure, and Sir Henry promised to furnish any accounts which were necessary to elucidate this subject.
The vote of 720,859l. 12s. 10d. was then agreed to, as well as another of 94,900l. for foreign half-pay.
On the Resolution that a sum not exceeding 47,686l. 1s. 8d. be granted to his Majesty for the purpose of defraying the charge of the In-pensioners of Chelsea and Kilmainham Hospitals,
§ Mr. Humeobserved, that the time was come for doing away with this grant. In this case the pay of the officers alone was no less than 11,300l. He found that there was a comptroller, a surgeon, and a secretary, who was also deputy-paymaster, and the services of all these persons, in his opinion, might be dispensed with. He should like to know from the hon. and gallant Secretary how many men these hospitals contained.
§ Sir H. Hardingereplied, he believed Chelsea about 500, and Kilmainham about 400.
§ Sir H. Hardingeexplained, that the expense of the establishment was not only for the maintenance of the men within the hospital but for the payment of 8,500 out pensioners. Kilmainham could not be abolished without increasing the expense, but reductions were in progress.
§ Mr. Humesaid, he was glad to hear that, but he hoped the reductions would be principally in the salaries of the superior officers; for the clerks of Chelsea Hospital were worse paid than the officers of any other Government establishment, while the paymaster received 1,200l. a-year though several of the clerks did not receive above 90l
§ Mr. Calcraftwas of the same opinion, and had wished the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer to raise the salaries of those clerks, but could not get him to advance one shilling.
§ Lord Althorpasked, whether there was 1361 any difficulty in procuring clerks for Chelsea Hospital at the present rate of payment. If there did not exist any difficulty, he saw no reason for raising the salaries.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that when applied to by the hon. Member on the subject, he had asked the very same question as the noble Lord had just put.
§ Mr. Humesaid, he had no wish to see the salaries of those clerks increased, but he thought that the salaries in other departments ought to be brought down to the scale adopted at Chelsea Hospital.— Resolution carried.
§ The Question, that a sum not exceeding 1,241,601l. 17s. 8d. be granted to defray the charge of the Out-pensioners of Chelsea Hospital, was put.
§ Mr. Humenoticed the frauds which had been committed by claimants on this fund, and complimented the right hon. the Secretary of War for the inquiry he had instituted, and the money he had been thereby enabled to save the country. He declared his conviction, that if the late Secretary of War, the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor, had continued in office, that inquiry would not have been set on foot.
§ Sir John Wrottesleyinquired if any commanding officer had lent himself to the abuses which had been detected?
§ Sir H. Hardingereplied, not one. The parties were interested persons, and the system of fraud was found out by a forgery having been detected. He had good reason to believe that it would not happen again.
§ Sir John Wrottesleyinquired whether the regimental books were not under the care of the adjutants?
§ Sir H. Hardingereplied, that the frauds were committed several years ago, and in most of the cases the adjutants had been removed.
§ Sir John Wrottesleyadmitted that this explanation was satisfactory, but he was bound to observe that these abuses could not have been perpetrated without gross mismanagement. He did not mean to enter into details, but it was a plain common sense view that the country could not possibly support in idleness a vast number of persons whose maintenance cost the country as much as the whole effective army. While the labourer was obliged to work fifteen or sixteen hours a day for a miserable pittance, that scarcely preserved his existence, the pensioned soldier 1362 was living in luxury and idleness, often setting an example of drunkenness and debauchery. The labourers, from witnessing such examples, became reckless. They had no motives for good conduct, and therefore the House must not wonder at the number of petty crimes which were continually committed.
§ Sir H. Hardingesaid, that the number of persons on the half-pay list was 81,000. Mr. Trant believed that the discovery of the frauds was accidental, and he affirmed that the hon. member for Montrose was not warranted in casting any reflection on the noble Lord the late Secretary-at-War.
§ Mr. Humedid not mean to cast any reflection on the noble Lord, but he did not think the discovery was altogether accidental. A person was tried by a court martial, which found the charge vexatious; the circumstances which transpired led to an inquiry, and the accuser was dismissed from the army. From what had then occurred he was satisfied that the abuses could not have taken place, if the attestations required had been preserved at the War-Office. He believed that these frauds were quite unknown to the officers, but he also believed that they could not have occurred had there not been a considerable degree of negligence in not enrolling the attestations.
§ Sir H. Hardingesaid, it was not possible, under the old system, to check those frauds, and he must say that both the War-Office and the late Secretary at War were entirely blameless.
§ The Question was agreed to.
§ The Question being put that a sum not exceeding 20,986l. 13s. 3d. be granted to defray the expense of the Royal Military Asylum,
§ Sir John Wrottesleycomplained that half of the amount voted was expended on the officers, instead of being applied to the benefit of the orphans in the institution. He admitted that the objects of the charity were meritorious, but he must contend, that under the circumstances of the country a reduction in the expense ought to take place.
§ Mr. Humesaid, that that institution grew out of a state of war, was at present uncalled for, and would, he hoped, be gradually done away.
§ Sir H. Hardingedid not concur in opinion with the hon. Member for Aberdeen. The country was bound to provide for the 1363 orphans of those who had died in its service, and there was no other or better means than the Asylum. Many of them were born abroad, when their fathers were on foreign service, and had no claims on any parish. Since last year the number had been reduced by 300: the expense was only 20l. a head, and he thought such an institution, kept up at so small an expense, deserved support.
§ Mr. Humesaid, he was of opinion that if there were no establishment, then there would be no children to provide for; the friends and relatives of the orphans would take care of them; but as long as the Government took the charge upon it, the relatives naturally said, why should we be inconvenienced by those whom the Government taxes us to provide for. Children were accordingly sent from all parts. Public establishments put an end to private charity. Once say, that after 1831 or 1832 this establishment should cease, and nothing more would be heard of orphans claiming the support of the country.
§ Mr. Monckthought, if the vote were continued, it ought to be more definitely appropriated. It could not for one moment be affirmed, that all the children of soldiers who chose to marry should be supported at the national expense. In principle he thought the children should not have a claim, as a matter of right, to be placed in the Asylum.
Sir John Sebrightsupported the grant, because it was proper to provide for the children of those who had died in the service of the country.
§ Sir H. Hardingesaid, that great reductions had been made in the establishment since the peace.
§ Mr. Humewas of opinion, that if this principle of providing for the children of those who died in the public service were once admitted, it ought to be extended to all functionaries, and then he did not know why the committee should not grant 40,000l. instead of 20,000l. In fact, though not an enemy to charity, he was disposed to resist such a principle.
§ Mr. Protheroewas also opposed to the grant, being convinced, by what the hon. Member for Montrose said., that if the public did not undertake to provide for such orphans they would be taken care of by their friends.
§ Sir H. Hardingeassured the Committee that no larger sum would ever be required, and he would also assert that the strictest 1364 impartiality was observed in admitting applicants.
§ Resolution agreed to.
§ The next Resolution was for a sum not exceeding 145,267l. to defray the Pensions to be paid to the Widows of Officers of the Land-forces for the year 1830.
§ Mr. Humesaid, that the number of widows who died and the number who were put upon the list during the year ought to be specifically detailed. He inquired whether any regulations had been adopted by Government since last Session, as to the manner of granting these pensions. It was necessary to have more information before voting the sum required.
§ Sir H. Hardingesaid, that these pensions were in future to be granted only to the widows of officers who had served ten years, and who had been on full pay for that period, or to the widows of officers who had been killed in action. It had also been settled, that when the widow married again, the pension should cease.
§ Mr. Humethought it desirable, that the estimates for Navy and Ordnance pensions should be placed upon the same footing with the Army. There was a reduction of five per cent made upon the pensions of the soldier, while no such reduction was made in the pensions granted to the Artillery or the Navy. The soldier, therefore, considered himself plundered, though, if the Estimates were properly stated, he would see that credit was given him for the reduction of five per cent in his pension. All the military and naval pensions should therefore be stated in the same way.
§ Sir H. Hardingesaid, the reduction of five per cent was made upon the pensions of the soldiers serving in the line, by an Act passed in the reign of Geo. 2nd, and it was then conceived but fair, that such reduction should not apply to the Ordnance, as the individual serving in the Ordnance was at the expense of his agency, and it was thought also, at that time, that he could not be admitted to Chelsea Hospital. The reduction was, in fact, equal, both in the Line and in the Ordnance.
§ Mr. Monckcontended, that we ought to take example by France and America, and endeavour to reduce the present extravagant expenditure connected with our army. He objected to the extravagant amount of this estimate. Why should officers' widows receive pensions, while 1365 the widows of private soldiers, who were equally deserving, and more in want of such assistance, received no pensions? They made a provision for the rich widows, while the poor widows were left without any provision at all. It was worth remark also, that the poor were the largest contributors to the fund. In 1745 it appeared, from a report then made to the House, that the pension granted to a Colonel's widow was 50l., and that to an Ensign's, 16l. At present the widow of a General officer received 120l., of a Colonel, 90l., of a Lieut.-colonel, 80l., of a Major, 70l., and of an Ensign, 16l. This statement showed what an increase had been made in the pensions of the superior officers' widows since 1745; while no increase had been made in the pensions of the Ensigns' widows. Formerly, too, these pensions were not granted without strict inquiry; that check was now withdrawn, and numerous instances had occurred of pensions being drawn by persons after they had ceased to be widows, having married again. By such neglect, the sum required for these pensions had gone on increasing. In 1806 it amounted to 104,000l., in 1823 to 136,000l., and then the Committee was asked for no less than 145,000l. This was an enormous increase during a period when our army had been diminished in numbers. In none of the Continental states were there are any such charges connected with the army estimates, and if the expense increased in the same ratio, henceforward, we should soon have to pay more for our small army of 90,000, than was paid for all the armies of the Continent. Economy was strength, and profusion weakness, and if profusion were continued, we should by-and-by be in the most lamentable state of debility. It appeared from the accounts published of the French army, that it consisted of 190,000 men, and was as efficient as any army of Europe. Though that army was well provided with Staff-officers—indeed it was a complaint that it had too many—it cost only 121,640,000 francs, or a sum short of 5,000,000l. a year. This army was even maintained at a less expense than that of Prussia, though the government of Prussia be one of the most economical of Europe. The Prussian army at present amounted to 100,000 men, and it cost 78,000,000 francs, or more than 3,000,000l. a year. The French army of 190,000 men, was maintained at a less 1366 expense than our army of 90,000. The House of Commons, which was bound to watch over the public expenditure, was to blame for this. It had allowed such extravagance that our establishments were conspicuous, not for their efficiency, but for the enormous sums they cost. He believed the reason of all this was to be found in the constitution of that House. The Members sitting there as the proprietors of boroughs, or the nominees of Peers, represented their patrons or themselves, and not the people. They helped themselves, or provided for their masters, out of the public purse. According to his view, therefore, there was no other efficient remedy for all this extravagance but a reform of Parliament. As long as that House only represented a few peers, or a few borough proprietors, economy would not be thought of. He would call on the House to look particularly at the superannuations and pensions. One public servant out of every score was superannuated, or pensioned; and besides all these pensions and superannuations, there were charges for widows and orphans. There was a vast sum so expended, which went, he believed, to persons who were altogether inefficient, and who had never been otherwise. In the present state of the country it could not be tolerated, when labour was obtaining little or no reward, that it should be taxed to support these useless burthens. The system by weakening the resources of the country, went to deprive it of independence, and rob it of honour; and by plundering the industrious people, it destroyed at the same time, both their loyalty and their honesty. Such a system could not possibly be continued, and he, therefore, not saying one word as to the amount of the grant, should object to it on principle.
§ Mr. Humethought it was monstrous that the country should be called on to vote pensions for upwards of a thousand widows, and that no specific information should be laid before the House of the circumstances which made it proper to grant those pensions. A detailed description of every new case for which a pension was granted, with an account of the number of pensions which ceased every year, ought annually to be submitted to Parliament.
§ Sir Henry Hardingehad no objection to lay such information before Parliament, as to the classes of officers whose widows were receiving pensions; but there was no 1367 law requiring such information as that specified by the hon. Member to be laid before Parliament. As to what had fallen from the hon. Member, as to not continuing the pensions to those widows who re-married, Lord Palmerston brought a measure of that kind before the House in 1818, but was compelled to abandon it by the Gentlemen on the opposite side. With respect to the small expense of the French army, he could inform the Committee that a proposition had recently been made to increase the pensions of the French military officers. In America the number of pensioners was nearly double the amount of the effective force.
§ Lord Howickvindicated the Opposition side of the House from the charge of encouraging extravagance. Only the year before last, the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues opposed the reduction of the useless office of Lieut. General of the Ordnance.
§ Resolution agreed to.
§ The next Resolution was for a sum not exceeding 185,036l. for allowances on the Compassionate List; for allowances as of his Majesty's Royal Bounty; and for pensions to officers for wounds.
§ Mr. John Stewartsuggested, that as all pensions were only granted as a means of support to persons supposed to be otherwise destitute, that pensions ought in all cases to be withdrawn when the circumstances of the persons rendered them independent of that means of subsistence.
§ Mr. Humewished to know whether care was taken in the granting of the last-mentioned pensions, that the officers to whom they were granted were wounded, as he had known individuals without wounds in the receipt of such pensions.
§ Sir H. Hardingesaid, that an officer must, under the existing regulations, undergo the examination of five medical men, and he must prove before the Medical Board, that he had suffered a permanent injury, equal to the loss of a limb, before a pension could be granted for a wound. That examination also must take place five years after the wound had been received, and if it could not then be proved that the injury was permanent, no pension was granted.
§ Sir H. Hardingeexplained, that the former was to provide for orphans, and 1368 that the latter was for widows whose husbands had fallen in battle.
§ Mr. Monckfurther inquired if those widows were not entitled to pensions under the preceding estimate. To him it appeared that these widows was the very class of persons for whom the last estimate was meant to provide.
§ Sir H. Hardingereplied, that the allowances were not, in fact, granted to the widows who might have no claim, or having a claim, might also have large families, and no means to provide for them, but were granted to the children of those who had fallen in battle. The total amount of pensions under this head did not exceed 40,000l. and the sums granted varied from 6l. to 16l. They ceased, he had also to observe, when the boys were eighteen and the girls twenty-one years of age.
§ Mr. Humesaid there were no means, if these items were not included in the regular estimates for the army, of checking the amount of them, which might grow up to be enormous.
§ Sir H. Hardingesaid, if the Compassionate Fund went to provide for the children of those who had died in the service, the Royal Bounty was limited to persons whose husbands or fathers had been killed in the service. Such an employment of funds was one, he was sure, which the Committee would never refuse to sanction by its vote.
§ Resolution agreed to.
§ The next Resolution was for the sum of 54,204l. for allowances, compensations, and emoluments in the nature of superannuated allowances, to persons formerly belonging to the several public departments in Great Britain and Ireland.
Mr. Maberlywished to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether this estimate were made up in conformity with the Act of Parliament? Pensions sanctioned by the Treasury, or by an order of Council, were not legal until sanctioned by that House. There was no better mode of checking these pensions than by having them specifically stated in the army as they now were in the navy. He would recommend to the hon. and gallant Secretary that this should in future be done.
§ Sir H. Hardingeadmitted that these pensions were specifically stated in the Ordnance estimates; but said that that was not ordered by the Act of Parliament, but had been adopted in consequence of a 1369 suggestion of the hon. Member for Aberdeen. He had no objection against the plan which the hon. Member had suggested being adopted, in future years, in the army.
§ Lord Sandonsuggested, that the particulars of every case in which superannuation was granted should be made out.
§ Sir H. Hardingeagreed with his noble friend, that such an account would be very desirable.
§ Mr. Humeexpressed himself of the same opinion, and thought that the names of pensioners, and the length of their service should be added. He wished to know how it was that such a number of Lieutenant-governors of the Military School were placed on the pension list.
§ Sir H. Hardingeexplained, that the late Lieutenant-governor was upwards of seventy years of age, and at that time of life a man ceased to be very fit to manage young boys. And as it was customary to give the situation to officers of long standing and respectability, a few years additional service at the college brought their public lives to a close.
§ Mr. Humeinquired if the present Lieutenant-governor of the Military College received pay from any other corps or office.
§ Sir H. Hardingereplied, that the Lieutenant-governor was a Lieutenant-colonel of Cavalry, and received his regimental pay as well as his staff pay, consistently with the rule of the service.
§ Mr. Humesaid, that was a practice to which he must object, as in fact it kept out of sight a part of the expense of the establishment. When an officer was placed on the staff in India, his regimental pay ceased, and he thought the same rule ought to be followed at home.
§ Sir H. Hardingesaid, that it had always been customary for the officers in the English service to retain their regimental pay when placed on the staff, and he thought he could prove that this practice was at once the most economical, as well as the fairest. At the close of the war the staff officers returned to their regiments, and continued in active service without any additional expense to the country.
§ Colonel Bailliewas of opinion that the hon. Member for Aberdeen made a mistake as to the Indian army, the officers of which, when placed on the staff, continued to receive their regimental pay.
§ Mr. Humesaid, that as he had been a Paymaster himself for some years he could venture to say that he was right.
§ Resolution agreed to.
§ The next Resolution was for 32,000l. for the purpose of defraying the charge of Exchequer fees.
§ Mr. Humeand Mr. Maberly both objected to the payment of these fees, which they considered disgraceful to the country.
§ Resolution agreed to.
§ On the motion that the Chairman should report these Resolutions to the House,
Mr. Gordonrose to ask the hon. Secretary when he meant to bring up the Report, as he intended upon that occasion to propose a Resolution to the following effect:—" That it is the opinion of this House, that as long as the regulation is in force by which Officers on the Half-pay of the Army, Navy, Ordnance, and Marine, are prevented from receiving the whole of their half-pay, or any part thereof, whilst they are enjoying the emoluments of civil office, it is expedient and just that the same regulation should extend to officers on full-pay of the Army, Navy, Marine, and Ordnance, who enjoy the emoluments of civil office, or of any other naval and military allowances."
§ Sir H. Hardingesaid, that it would be most agreeable to him to have the report on these resolutions brought up to-morrow. He should certainly oppose this resolution; and if the gentlemen who had motions for to-morrow would give him precedence for but half an hour, he thought that he could dispose of it most effectually in that time.
§ The Chairman left the chair; the report to be received to-morrow,