MILITARY PENSIONS. (Hansard, 10 August 1846)

§ CAPTAIN LAYARD
said, that he trusted it had not escaped the recollection of the House that within a short period he had presented four petitions from the out-pensioners of Chelsea Hospital, praying the House to take into consideration that which they stated they considered a great hardship, and in which he fully agreed, that 5 per cent should be stopped from their pensions, particularly as such stoppages were not made either from the marines or sailors. And why the soldier should be stopped and the others not, to him was unaccountable; not that he wished that 5 per cent be stopped from the marines and sailors—far from it. What he desired was that no stoppage should be made from any; and actuated by that desire, in the justice of which all whom he had consulted upon the subject entirely agreed, he determined to bring the matter under discussion. Now, of these petitions, two had been printed by order of the House. The petitioners state "that it is a heavy loss to them, that one-twentieth of their pensions gained in fighting the battles of our common country, and thereby increasing its immense power and riches, should be stopped." They likewise state that, in adverting to the common principle that now prevails in advancing or lending money, "they conceive 5 per cent monthly an exorbitant tax; and that the continuance of it must be owing simply to the matter never having been brought under the notice of your honourable House." Now, the Act by 561 which this deduction was authorized was the 27th Geo. II., and was entitled, "An Act for the Relief of the Out-pensioners of the Royal Hospital of Chelsea." Now, this Act was passed to alter the old system of paying pensioners, than which nothing could be worse. At that time (1754) the pensioners received their pensions in the following manner — namely, the payment of a year's pension only after the same was "become due; and which, as the Act recites, exposed them to great hardships and distresses, making them take money up for present subsistence, on credit, of persons called money lenders, on terms frequently oppressive and usurious. The Act then goes on to state, that to prevent this bad system the pensioners shall be paid six months in advance. Now, in Clause 7, it states, "that the treasurer of Chelsea Hospital shall and may withhold and deduct one shilling in the pound from all moneys so paid to out-pensioners of Chelsea Hospital; and which moneys so deducted shall be so applied in the manner which His Majesty, his heirs, and successors shall, by warrant under his royal sign-manual, direct." This system went on for some time; paying six months in advance. Then it was reduced to three; and about two years ago, by a plan of Lord Hardinge's, staff-officers were appointed to pay pensioners; and now they were only paid one month in advance, which plan was, in his (Captain Layard's) opinion, a very good one, and likely to be highly beneficial to the country. But by the 3rd and 4th William IV., only 2½ per cent is to be stopped from the new rate of pensions. So that, under the present system, the old and hard-tried Peninsular veterans had 5 per cent stopped; and those who, no doubt, were just as good soldiers, but could never have the same severe trials, were to pay only 2½ per cent. No doubt he should be told that the pensions of the latter were smaller. Alas! that such was the case was too true; and a disgrace to the nation it was that it should be so. Now, he must recall to their minds that, within a few weeks, at the gracious recommendation of Her Majesty, they had voted pensions to those gallant officers who had deserved so well of their country—Lord Hardinge and Lord Gough—to support that dignity which Her Majesty had bestowed upon them for their gallant achievements, having raised them to the temple of honour, as a reward for their having taken so high a station in the temple of fame. For his (Captain Lay- 562 ard's) part, he could not believe that any one for a moment would suppose that either 5 per cent or 2½ per cent would or ought to be stopped from the pensions of those gallant leaders. And if such was the case, how could the Parliament think of any longer allowing this stoppage to be made from their no less worthy and gallant companions in arms? But he felt that the great enemy he had to contend with was the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer; but he trusted that upon this occasion he would let his love of justice overcome his love of economy; and he thought when he informed the right hon. Gentleman that the hon. Member for Montrose was to second his Resolution, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would feel that it was an act of justice which no economical feeling ought to counteract. Shall it be said that those who can say to their children or their grandchildren, "I fought with Hardinge at Albuera — I was at the storming of Burtpore with Lord Combermere—I helped to take the eagle at Barossa with Gough—I fought with Napier in India—I formed part of that force at Waterloo under Wellington, whose squares were invulnerable, and whose advance in line was invincible"—shall these men, when they shoulder their crutch, and show how fields were won—shall these men end their narrative by stating, "We petitioned the British House of Commons—we petitioned the representatives of the people no longer to allow the paltry deduction of five per cent from our pensions, and our prayers were unheeded?" He called upon the protectionist party, who had talked so much of standing to their colours and nailing them to the mast, to remember that the standard of their country had been carried untarnished by the agricultural labourer to honour and glory. He reminded the manufacturers that many of those who had been operatives had by their gallant bearing as soldiers opened new marts in the uttermost parts of the world. He called upon all in that House to remember upon what a pinnacle of glory this country had been placed by her army, and to remember how poorly that army had been requited. The right hon. Baronet, the late Prime Minister, had, upon a former occasion, upon bringing forward the pensions to Lord Hardinge and Lord Gough, read to them from Napier's History of the Peninsular War—that brilliant history of brilliant exploits—the account of the horrible and bloody fight of Albuera, where, 563 by Hardinge's perseverance, victory had been achieved. He trusted the House would allow him to follow the late Prime Minister's example, and read an extract from that book, and which would prove how worthy a cause he stood there to advocate. Napier says— That the British infantry soldier is more robust than the soldier of any other nation can scarcely be doubted by those who, in 1815, observed his powerful frame distinguished amidst the united armies of Europe; and notwithstanding his habitual excess in drinking, he sustains fatigue and wet, and the extremes of cold and heat, with incredible vigour when completely disciplined; and three years are required to accomplish this. His port is lofty and his movements free; the whole world cannot produce a nobler specimen of military bearing. Nor is the mind unworthy of the outward man. He does not, indeed, possess that presumptuous vivacity which would lead him to distate to his commander, or even to censure real errors, although he may perceive them; but he is observant, and quick to comprehend his orders—full of resources under difficulties, calm and resolute in danger, and more than usually obedient and careful of his officers in moments of imminent peril. It has been asserted that his undeniable firmness in battle is the result of a phlegmatic constitution uninspired by moral feeling. Never was a more stupid calumny uttered. Napoleon's troops fought in bright fields where every helmet caught some beams of glory; but the British soldier conquered under the cold shade of aristocracy. No honours awaited his daring—no despatch gave his name to the applause of his countrymen. His life of danger and hardship was un-cheered by hope, his death unnoticed. Did his heart sink therefore? Did he not endure with surprising fortitude the sorest of ills, sustain the most terrible assaults in battle unmoved, overthrowing, with incredible energy, every opponent, and at all times proving, that while no physical military qualification was wanting, the fount of honour was also full and fresh within him? The result of a hundred battles, and the united testimony of impartial writers of different nations, have given the first place amongst European infantry to the British. Such was the description of those men—and could any one deny the truthfulness of that description — for whom he stood the humble advocate. And he trusted and believed that neither the House nor the country would or could neglect their petitions. No one knew—no one could say at what moment the safety of the country might depend upon these pensioners; they were the only force which you could call together in case of any sudden emergency, for of regular troops you had very few; you could lay your hands upon the Colonies, taking up so large a proportion, while the pensioners, consisting of 73,500, gave 25,000 available men fit to do good service, and 25,000 more fit for garrison duty. And this alone showed the advantage of 564 acting generously and kindly; for if it had not been for these pensions, by some so much abused, where could you have such a force to call out in a moment, and available at once? That brilliant history from which he had before quoted ended with this touching sentence:— Thus the war terminated, and with it all remembrance of the veteran's services. Were the House of Commons prepared to let such a sentence stand against them to all time? Were they prepared to have it go forth that they refused the petition of these men, whose military achievements had been the admiration of thc world? He felt that should the right hon. Secretary at War oppose this Resolution, he would be acting against his own generous nature, and the anxious desire he had always personally evinced to benefit the soldier. But he trusted the House would feel, whatever was the course taken by the Government, that the petitions ought to be granted. He felt he had done well in giving them an opportunity of doing these gallant men a justice, however tardy, a reward, however inefficient. He should end by calling upon them to— Pity the sorrows of each brave old man, Whose shattered frame can carry arms no more, Whose life is dwindled to the shortest span: His prayer but grant, and Heaven will bless your store. He, therefore, begged to move— That in the opinion of this House, the pensions paid to Non-Commissioned Officers and Privates of the Army should be paid without fee or deduction whatsoever.

§ MR. HUME
seconded the Resolution, observing that he could not understand on what principle one class of pensioners, and they the poorer, should be subjected to a charge from which the wealthy were exempted.

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
lamented that this subject should have been broached in the absence of the Secretary at War, whose presence in another place was rendered just then imperative by the nature of his duties. He trusted that the gallant Officer would not on the present occasion press his Motion, but would, under all the circumstances of the case, be satisfied with the assurance which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had no hesitation in giving him—that the matter was one which would most certainly engage the serious attention of Her Majesty's Government. There could be no 565 doubt that the present system was a very anomalous one, and should be inquired into.

§ CAPTAIN LAYARD
was satisfied with this assurance, and would withdraw his Motion. Motion withdrawn.