SUPPLY—YEOMANRY. (Hansard, 8 March 1841)

§ Mr. Bramston
called the attention of the House to one of the estimates not yet voted, he meant the estimate for the volunteer corps; and he knew that it was impossible to move for an increase. The cast td which he wished to direct the attention of Ministers was that of the county of Essex, where there was no local yeomanry force, although the population was 317,000, whilst Hertfordshire, with not half the population, had six corps. It could be said, as an excuse for not appointing yeomanry in Essex, that it was in the neighbourhood of London, and that it was possible to send the household troops because that reason would apply equally to Middlesex itself, and in that county there were two troops in the neighbourhood of Uxbridge. He would content himself now with calling the attention of the House and of her Majesty's Ministers to the subject, and at a more convenient time be would take the sense of the House upon the propriety of an increase, unless he should find, that Government were disposed to apply a remedy.

§ Mr. Fox Maule
said, that as the subject came more immediately under the control of the department in which he had the honour to hold office, than in that of his right hon. Friend the Secretary at War, whose duty was limited more especially to the matter of accounts, he thought it right to answer as shortly as he could the complaint which had been made. In 1838, the yeomanry generally in this country consisted of a large force, and it seemed expedient to the Government, with a view to economy, that this force should be in some respects reduced. The hon. Gentleman seemed to insinuate that the reduction had been made more from partiality than from 15 any just principle, and though no complaint had been heretofore made, the hon. Gentleman desired now to found upon this a charge against the Government. The principle on which this reduction had been made, was because it appeared to the Government that when some reduction could be made, there was no better principle that could be applied than to save the pockets of the people when you can, and they on their parts would then be more willing to give pecuniary assistance when it was really required for the protection of the public tranquillity. With this view, his noble Friend (Lord John Russell) had considered the state of the yeomanry force, and wherever he had found that the corps had rendered little service, or where the regiments had not within a certain period been called out for active duty, his noble Friend, without disparaging or doubting the excellent sentiments, or the loyalty of the officers or men, had made a reduction. Such was the case with the county of Essex, respecting which there had been no remonstrance made at the time. But his noble Friend had sanctioned the continuance of yeomanry corps where they defrayed their own expenses, and if the Lord-lieutenant of the county thought fit to retain their services. One corps in the county of Essex did volunteer still to serve, paying their own expenses; they thus served for a year, but at the end of that period they made application for pay, and were informed that it was directly contrary to the understanding on which they had served, and that it could not be granted. The hon. Gentleman had not now any right to complain that when they applied for pay, after it had been distinctly understood that they should serve without, their further services should be dispensed with. He, therefore, thought that he had said enough to justify the step that had been taken for saving money to the public.

§ Mr. Goulburn
begged leave to refresh the recollection of the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. The hon. Gentleman had stated, that there were no complaints of partiality when the reductions were made. He would beg to call to the hon. Gentleman's remembrance, that cases were stated at the time—whether justly or unjustly he did not mean to say—in which partiality was imputed; and the hon. Gentleman might, perhaps, remember, that a comparison, or rather a contrast, was made between the services 16 of the forces employed at Waltham Abbey and those stationed at Hungerford. It might also be in the memory of the hon. Gentleman, that it was said, that a corps which had been reduced in Hertfordshire, was replaced on the recommendation of a gentleman who was favourable to the existing Government. He recommended at the time, that the Essex yeomanry should be maintained on pay, on the ground that they had been appointed at the request of Lord Melbourne, when Secretary of State, to protect the Ordnance stores at Waltham Abbey; yet the Government thought fit to reduce those forces. He was, however, happy to say, that the corps served free of expense. In his opinion, it would not only be wise, but in the ordinary course of courtesy, to retain these men on pay.

Lord John Russell's
recollection certainly was, that complaints as to this reduction had been made at the time on the ground that this corps would be of use for the Ordnance stores, but, on referring to the Ordnance Department, they held, that it would be quite unnecessary to keep up the corps for that alleged purpose, and it was on that reference to the Ordnance, that it had been thought right not to retain the services of this corps. There were at the time certainly complaints of partiality in making the reduction, but these complaints were not confined to one side of the House, for he believed, that there were more complaints from his own Friends than from Gentlemen opposite. With regard to the county of Hertford, the corps were under a noble Lord connected with that county. Yet, after all the reduction that had been so much complained of, there were 3,000 or 4,000 more yeomanry now kept up than at the time when the Duke of Wellington was in office; and he said, that it must be a great satisfaction to the House, as it was to the Government, that there had been no extraordinary charge during the last year on account of any yeomanry having been called out.

Sir Hussey Vivian
said, that application had been made to the Ordnance to know whether it was necessary to keep up this corps, for the protection of the Ordnance stores, and the reply was, that it was not necessary.

§ Sir Henry Hardinge
had heard, that there was a correspondence in which it was said to be desirable and necessary to keep up this corps for the protection of 17 the works which might require defence in half an hour.

Sir Hussey Vivian
was not aware of any such correspondence, and must observe, that there were always workmen ready for the defence of the works on an emergency.