HC Deb 16 July 1849 vol 107 cc452-63

The House then went into Committee; Mr. Bernal in the chair.

On the Vote for 361,895l. for Pay, Al- lowances, and Contingencies, of Ordnance Military Corps,

MR. HUME

said, that as the report of the Committee on the Ordnance Estimates had now been received, he trusted the Government intended to make some statement of what they intended to do.

COLONEL ANSON

assured the hon. Member and the Committee, that it was from no disrespect to him or them that he had not made such a statement. He should have been happy to avail himself of the opportunity so to do, but wished in the first instance to hear if any objections were made to the estimates. He thought that the report, ably drawn up as it was, would be of absolutely little use to the Committee until the evidence had been appended to it. If, however, hon. Members would turn to the last page of the report, they would find recommendations of the Committee that the Government should take the matter into their consideration during the recess; and he had no hesitation in saying that the Government would certainly take into their most serious and deliberate consideration all the recommendations which had been made by the Committee. But at the same time it would not be right in the Government, or any Member of it, to enter into a pledge to carry out any particular recommendation. With respect to Vote No. 1, the Committee had not recommended that there should be any reduction in the military force of the country. Upon Vote 2, containing the commissariat and barrack supplies, the Committee reported that they had "noticed the increased charge to the public arising from the system recently adopted by the Treasury in regard to the troops in Ireland, although this does not appear in the Ordnance Estimates, and they have suggested the expediency of reverting to the mode of supplying the troops previously in use." He believed that in the answers he had given before that Committee, he had expressly stated that that was also his opinion. At the same time he must bear his testimony to the manner in which this department had been conducted, and he had no reason to believe that the system was different now from what it had been. The Committee further reported, under Vote 3—the Ordnance Office—that they believed "that any improvement in the practical working of the office can only be effected by the Executive Government, and by the co-operation of persons familiar with the details of business now transacted by the Ordnance." They also recommended that "the warrant of 1825 should be revised, and that the control of the Treasury over all salaries and new appointments should be rendered complete." In that department largo powers had been exercised with great discretion, but he did not know that any great objection could be offered to an alteration in the mode of procedure. The Committee then recommended, under Vote 4—the Ordnance and Barrack Establishments—that "the number of artificers and workmen in the manufacturing departments, at Woolwich and elsewhere, should be fixed according to the wants of the service in time of peace, and that no addition should be made without the written sanction of the Treasury." Now, it was very difficult to fix the establishment in this department, for the extent of it must depend upon emergencies; and it happened that very large alterations, as in guns and the carriages for them, were made in one year, so that the establishment fixed for that year was unfit for another. At the same time, it was of course right and proper that this establishment should be brought specially under the consideration of the Treasury, and that no increase whatever should take place without their sanction. There was another recommendation of the Committee with respect to the establishments in the colonies, to the effect that "some of the establishments in the smaller colonies in the West Indies and Canada should be dispensed with; and the Committee are of opinion that in Canada, with the present improved means of communication by steam and railroads, the concentration of stores at a smaller number of stations might be sufficient for the supply of the force to be maintained there." It could not, of course, be the object of the Government to keep up unnecessary expenditure, and he would only observe, as regarded the department to which he had the honour to belong, that the supreme authority in that department, the Master General of the Ordnance, had upon every occasion evinced the utmost anxiety to avoid superfluous expenses. Every inquiry should be made as to the necessity for maintaining some of these establishments, and he had no hesitation in saying, that the Government would take this recommendation of the Committee into their consideration, and that, in some respects, it might be complied with. Under the vote No. 6, being for the Ordnance Stores, the Committee reported in these terms:— Your Committee direct the attention of the House to the large sums expended for these stores. The value of Ordnance stores at present in the custody of the department (exclusive of barrack stores) amounts to 6,420,000l, Your Committee cannot pretend to regulate the quantity of any articles which should be kept in store; but they recommend that the stores should be made to approximate more nearly to the wants of the service in time of peace. The large sums at various times expended for the purchase of stores, which are now obsolete, prove the expediency of maintaining a small stock of the more durable as well as of the perishable articles. The facilities which this country possesses of obtaining a large supply in the event of an emergency, might, in the opinion of your Committee, relieve the Ordnance from the necessity of keeping so largo a stock; and the more rapid means of conveyance, both by sea and land, which has enabled mercantile establishments to reduce their stock, might in a similar manner be rendered conducive to public economy. Your Committee recommend an inquiry into the present system of keeping the store accounts, in reference to which they have received some valuable evidence, a summary of which is to be found under Vote No. 3. He confessed he was not surprised that the Committee had expressed this opinion regarding the amount of stores, amounting to between 600,000l. and 700,000l.; but a great portion consisted of the most bulky and costly kind, which had of late years become obsolete by the introduction of different armaments. If the two classes of stores—those fit and those unfit for service—had been separated, the apparent amount of these stores would have been considerably reduced; and that would have been also a better way of showing the actual amount of effective stores on hand. Supposing the value of them to be half a million, for example; if they were brought into market he feared they would not fetch that price, and a deteriorated value had of necessity been put upon them. There might, no doubt, be some truth in the remark in the paragraph he had just read, that the facilities now possessed by the country of obtaining a large supply on an emergency, lessened the necessity of keeping a large stock; and that by the more rapid means of conveyance stores might be obtained more easily than formerly, and the Government would well consider that part of the question. It was all very well to say that we were in a time of peace. We were at peace, and he trusted "we should remain so; but the House would remember that when he had previously submitted these estimates we had also been at peace. In 1846, when he first brought them forward, they had been prepared by the Government of the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, by whom it had been thought advisable to recommend to the House an increase of force. The present Government could not, certainly, be held responsible for that; but they adopted the estimates of their predecessors because they deemed the measure wise and prudent. Again, in 1847, there was another increase proposed by the present Government in the artillery force—they having thought it necessary to pro-coed in the same course. And what were the circumstances of that year? Were they so peaceable as to induce us to alter our establishments, or was there anything in 1848, in the aspect of affairs, either abroad or at home, to cause us to reduce those establishments? In his opinion the aspect of affairs at that period was not so favourable as to justify the Government in proposing to Parliament any reduction in our military force, or in the establishments necessary to maintain them. He was satisfied that the Government would take this subject into their most serious consideration, and would carry out any measures of retrenchment which they might deem advisable. With respect to the items under Vote 6, the Committee were of opinion that they "should be further subdivided; and that it was desirable that the amount annually required for the purchase of timber, of iron, ordnance, and of gunpowder, should be separately stated." He said they would find the estimates drawn up and arranged under distinct heads, in a clear and simple form, carefully prepared by persons of experience appointed by the Treasury for that purpose. With regard to new buildings and repairs, the recommendation of the Committee was, that— No work should be commenced by the Ordnance, and no estimate for any new work should be submitted to the Treasury, without the previous sanction of a Secretary of State officially communicated to the Board of Ordnance. Before this authority is given, it is most important that a fixed plan, with a detailed estimate of the whole work, should be submitted to the Secretary of State, who is called on to record his official sanction on the part of the Government. Your Committee believe that this regulation, by fixing responsibility on a high officer of State, would tend to secure the public against needless expenditure, and they do not apprehend that it would prevent or retard the construction of works which may be necessary for the due protection of our own shores, or for the future maintenance of our maritime power and commercial interests. Your Committee do not intend by this recommendation to supersede the ultimate control and final responsibility which, after examination of the plan and estimate, will still attach to the Treasury. He had no hesitation in saying that that recommendation was very prudent and wise. It was not the course usually followed, yet as the Master of the Ordnance was generally a Member of the Cabinet, and therefore acquainted with the views of the Cabinet, his sanction of an estimate might be taken as the sanction of Her Majesty's Ministers. But still the Committee had thought proper to recommend that no works ought to be undertaken without the written sanction of the Secretary of State, and to that recommendation he could see no objection whatever. Their recommendations with regard to the works in detail were contained in the body of the report itself, as the Committee passed in review the various works required at the different establishments abroad. Bermuda was the first that received their attention, and for the works on that island the vote required this year was only 4,948l., certainly not a very large sum, considering the importance of the place on which it was to be expended. It would seem that the total estimate for these works was 60,892l., in addition to the sums that had already been expended upon them. Sir John Burgoyne, however, was of opinion that this sum of 60,000l. would not be sufficient probably to put the defences in so complete a state as could be wished. That was only his opinion. Earl Grey, when examined before the Committee, stated with regard to these works and the course to be taken with regard to them— That he considered Bermuda a most important station for the protection of our trade, and for the defence of our West India possessions. He is, however, of opinion that no new work should be commenced at Bermuda, because he has boon informed that Lord Dundonald, the admiral on the station, and Captain Elliot, the governor, recommend an alteration in the system of defence. The plan sanctioned in the year 1824 is said to be insufficient at the present time, and it has been suggested that a flotilla of steamers would afford the most effective means of defence. Colonel Reed, the former governor, who is also an engineer officer, has given to your Committee an opinion quite opposed to this view. So much at variance were the opinions given before the Committee on almost everything connected with the island. In the opinion of some, the defence of the island might be committed with great advantage to a flotilla of steamers, by that means superseding the necessity and the expense of permanent works. He should think, however, that taking into account the original expense of these steamers, the ever-recurring expense of repairs, and the great number of men that must he kept up to man them, they would be found much more costly in the end than the construction of permanent defences. This conflict of opinion in the Committee rendered it necessary that Government should institute an inquiry into the defences of that island, and he was instructed now to say, that that was the course which Government had determined to pursue. Now, as to the money required to be voted this year, although Government was desirous not to spend a farthing more than was necessary, still the sum of 4,900l. would be necessary for the works in progress which had already received the sanction of the Treasury. The sanction of the Treasury having been sent out to continue certain works begun, by this late period of the Session one half at least of the money must already have been spent, and therefore he hoped that the hon. Baronet the Member for Southwark would be content with the withdrawal of half the sum put down for the works in progress, and the undertaking of the Government not to commence any new works until due inquiry was made. But he was sure he would have the concurrence of the hon. Members for Montrose and for the West Riding, in thinking that economy would be best attained by putting the works in progress in a secure state of completion immediately. As to the vote for the Ionian Islands, the House might suppose, from the way in which it was inserted, that it was for new works; but he had to assure them that it was only for the continuance of works in progress. He begged the hon. Baronet to look to the recommendations of the Committee, and to consider that, unless in the case of wanton expenditure, they would hardly have ventured to advise arresting the progress of the works at Bermuda, the Mauritius, or the Ionian Islands. Let the House grant the votes required of them for the present year, and it would remain for them to see whether the Government, when they came forward next Session, had done their duty in attending to the recommendations of the Committee, and it would then he in the power of the hon. Members for Montrose and the West Riding to take the sense of the House, if they thought necessary, on the conduct of the Government. But he desired them to attend to this single fact, that the Ordnance Estimates were less than the amount voted last year by 20,000l.; and the hon. Member for Mon- trose would find that there was a difference of 500,000l between the present estimates and those asked for in 1848.

MR. HUME

said, the hon. and gallant Gentleman had attended to everything but just that on which he wished him to have animadverted: he referred to the number of the artillery. The Committee, it was true, did not take into consideration the increased votes for this arm of the service: it was not their duty to consider what was the number of artillery that ought to be maintained in a time of peace. He asserted on Friday that the expense under this particular head was 3,000,000l., and now he found he was borne out in his ridiculed assertion by the report of the Committee. He had asserted that the expense on this particular part of the service was just doubled. The hon. and gallant Gentleman would not credit his assertions: here, then, was the book; he would stick to it: in 1833, 1834, and 1835, the expense of the artillery was 1,402,000l.; but in 1848–49 it had become 2,897,000l.; being exactly double the sum he had already stated. A Committee that sat in 1828, when the charge for the artillery was only 721,000l., stated their opinion to be that the corps was larger than was necessary for keeping up efficient training and practice in a time of peace, and ought to be reduced to something near like what it was in 1792, when the expense was 471,000l. He complained that the number of men had been increased from 8,369 to 14,123. Last year the Government made a pretext that it would be necessary to raise 2,000 men additional without superior officers; but what did they do when they got the vote of Parliament for that body of men? Instead of adding twenty companies, as they ought to have done, they added but eighteen companies, forming an entirely new battalion, with colonels and lieutenant colonels and other officers. The answer was, that a few of the senior officers were requiring promotion, and this was taken as the course to effect that object, although it was done to the stopping of all promotion in the case of fifty or sixty of the subordinate officers. The wishes of the few were regarded to the detriment of the many. That was the sort of management of the department for which the hon. and gallant Gentleman wished him to give him credit, but which he certainly could not give him.

LORD J. RUSSELL

said, after his hon. and gallant Friend had very fully gone through the various topics connected with the report, the hon. Member for Montrose complained of his neglecting to touch upon another topic to which the attention of the Committee had been called, and to which the hon. Member wished to have called the House on Thursday night but for want of the report. However, the hon. Member had shown himself perfectly capable of entering into the question without reference to the report at all, although, for the want of it, they had postponed the consideration of the estimates on Thursday. With reference to the amount of the force, he had nothing to explain. It was only a few men less than it was in 1848; and in 1848 he stated, at the commencement of the Session, the reasons why in successsive years the artillery had been augmented. Without again going into the particulars of that statement, the general reason was, that artillery soldiers and officers required much longer time for training and preparation than the other services, and on that account it was desirable to keep up a considerable force. The hon. Gentleman, however, seemed to say that the best way to be prepared was to be unprepared. That might be a wise maxim, but it was new to him. With regard to the change made last year, it was thought better, instead of adding a certain number of companies, to add two new battalions. The hon. Gentleman said that had been done by the Master General of the Ordnance without his (Lord J. Russell's) knowledge. The fact, however, was, that the Master General represented to him that there was a great want of promotion in the higher ranks of the service; adding his opinion that the efficiency of the artillery would be increased by having the same number of men that was proposed in the previous year, but putting them into two battalions, with superior officers, and a fewer number of subordinates than had originally been in contemplation. He (Lord J. Russell) said that was a subject for serious consideration, and he gave no answer at that time. Some months afterwards, however, his noble Friend the Master General (the Marquess of Anglesea) again called his attention to the subject, showing him estimates for carrying the plan into effect, and he complied with the recommendation. So far, therefore, as responsibility was concerned, he was responsible for having concurred in that recommendation, and it had been submitted to Her Majesty entirely with his sanction. Upon a subject of this kind, he did not pretend that his opinion could have any great weight; but the number of men being the same, and the expense to the country also the same, he thought the opinion of the Master General, corroborated by the papers shown to him, was rather to be followed than any view formed by an unprofessional person. Such were the facts as to the increase in the force, and as to the manner in which it had been carried into effect. The hon. Gentleman had not alluded to the report of the Select Committee in reference to this subject. It so happened, however, that it spoke in strong terms of the importance of having a considerable force of artillery:— The amount of force which it may be necessary or expedient to maintain, is a question which has not been referred to the consideration of your Committee; but, in accordance with the terms of their appointment, they have made some inquiries into the expense of the artillery, and into the strength of the artillery compared with the rest of the Army. All the evidence given to your Committee shows the value of an efficient artillery officered by scientific men. The experience of modern warfare tends to strengthen this opinion; and your Committee desire distinctly to state, while they abstain from entering upon the consideration of the force to be maintained, that they regard the corps of artillery as the most important arm of the service, and, therefore, recommend that the proportion of the artillery to the rest of the Army should not be reduced. Such was the decided opinion of the Committee, and he was very happy to find that the opinion of the Government was corroborated by that of the Committee.

MR. HUME

thought the noble Lord must have been asleep whilst he bad been speaking. He had read from the report of the Committee, yet the noble Lord had the assurance to say he had not! Really if these things continued, he should hardly know whether he stood on his head or his heels. The noble Lord had not stated any political reasons for maintaining such a force of artillery. He (Mr. Hume) admitted the necessity of the force being efficient, but, upon the reasoning of the noble Lord, 40,000 men must be kept. Artillery ought only, as the Committee said, to be in proportion to the infantry; and the question was, whether the numbers now maintained were not in disproportion to that which ought to be a peace establishment. The Committee had not approved of two additional battalions with the necessary expense of additional officers. He, therefore, protested against the Minister of the Crown taking upon himself to sanction that Which the public cried shame upon. ["No, no!"] Yes, the public did: they accused the Master General of having raised two additional battalions instead of the companies as proposed. If the House of Commons were disposed to see this department doubled, contrary to the recommendation of a most important Committee, he would offer no further observation than this, that it was very singular the interests of the community in regard to expense should be so little attended to. He should not at that late hour divide the House, but he protested against the extravagance, the want of feeling, and the utter recklessness of the Government in this vote. There was not a shilling in the Exchequer, yet they were keeping up an enormous war establishment.

CAPTAIN BOLDERO

said, the noble Lord at the head of the Government having read one paragraph from the report, he would read another:— The progress of military science and tactics has, according to the concurrent testimony of the military authorities examined by your Committee, increased the importance of artillery; and, comparing the proportion of artillery in the British Army to the proportion in foreign armies, it will be found to be far less. The force in Great Britain and Ireland may be taken at 60,000 men; there are eighty field guns equipped on a low peace establishment; this gives one gun to about 750 men. Sir H. Hardinge stated, before the Committee of 1828, that at the battle of Waterloo the French had one gun to every 300 men, whilst the British had only one gun to 500 men. It was dangerous to continue such a disparity, particularly as in every engagement, except the last in India, our artillery had been deficient, not only in numbers, but in weight. He referred the House to what had been done by the artillery in Lord Gough's last action; and he thought that when foreign armies had one gun to every 300 men, whilst we had only one to 750 men, the time had arrived for some change. He suggested that the artillery might be made available for garrison and other service, the same as the battalions of the line.

MR. HUME

asked, what use there was for an overwhelming force of artillery? What use was there in the united kingdom for eighty guns, with all their appurtenances ready for action? Lord Hardinge, in 1828, wished the artillery to be maintained upon the scale of Waterloo. He thought of nothing else, as if we were going again to play pranks upon the Con- tinent. The people, however, would not submit to that. They knew that six hundred millions of debt had been contracted by it.

Vote agreed to.

The next vote proposed was for 151,650l. to complete the sum necessary to defray the Expenses of Commissariat and Barrack Supplies.

MR. HUME

said, the amount voted for barrack supplies in 1832 and 1833 was only 47,000l, yet this year it was 89,000l. He called for some explanation.

COLONEL ANSON

said, that the increase in the amount of this vote since the year 1835 arose from the fact that there were no store-rooms then in the Tower, and consequently no stores of clothing were prepared; and it must be recollected also that the increase in the number of men, reckoned only at 1l. a head, would account for a considerable portion of the increase.

Vote agreed to.

The next vote was for 45,881l., to defray the expense of the Ordnance Office.

MR. COBDEN

asked, if it was right to go on after midnight voting such large sums? He protested against going on with the estimates at that late hour. He should move that the Chairman do report progress.

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do report progress, and ask leave to sit again."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 14; Noes 107: Majority 93.

Committee report progress; to sit again on Wednesday.

House adjourned at half-past Two o'clock.