SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES. (Hansard, 8 March 1850)

§ MR. FOX MAULE
said, that at so late an hour he would merely request the House to decide upon the number of men for the service of the Army in the ensuing year. In what he had to state he would confine himself entirely to the vote for the number of men, reserving to another occasion the information necessary for the Committee in all its further details. He understood that, though the Government were about to present the House with an estimate for this year still further reduced than that for the year preceding, it was the intention of the hon. Member for Montrose to propose a further reduction on that reduced estimate, and to take the sense of the Committee upon it. Last year, when he (Mr. F. Maule) proposed a vote of 103,000 men, the hon. Gentleman moved for a reduction of that number to 100,000. For the present year he presented a vote in which the number of men was reduced to 99,128. With respect to that particular number, and to the statement of the hon. Gentleman the Member for the West Riding, which had been followed by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Manchester, and by the hon. Member for Montrose, he begged to draw the attention of the Committee to this fact, that so far from an increase of our force having been constantly maintained, the estimate for the present year, in comparison with the estimate for the year 1848–49, exhibited a deficiency of no less than 14,719 men. Then the hon. Member for the West Riding made another statement, that while we reduced the number of men, we did not reduce the number of officers. With respect to that, he would simply refer his hon. Friends to the estimates for the present year, where they would find that in a proposed reduction of 4,000 men, it was proposed to reduce no fewer than 128 officers. Though he intended to speak very briefly at so late an hour, he begged to draw the attention of the Committee to the fact, that so far from the officers of the Army having been proportionally increased since 1835 up to 1849, the proportion of officers to men in 1835 was one to 17, whereas it was now one officer to every 20 men only, and in all 617 augmentations which had been made since 1835, the proportion had been but one officer to 152 men. There was only one other point he would notice at present. He was no advocate for keeping up an undue and unfair proportion of officers to men, but he was still less an advocate for reducing the number of officers of our Army to barely sufficient to command the men; because it must be granted that the most economical mode of maintaining a force on which to rely at all times was to keep it in such a position that, if an exigency arose, it could be reinforced in the shortest time, and at the least possible expense. With these preliminary remarks he would proceed to submit to the Committee the vote for the number of men proposed for the present year; and if they would look to the estimates they would find that, as compared with the vote of March last year, there was an actual reduction of 4,126 officers and men. In order to effect that reduction, it was proposed to reduce the second battalions, which had been raised in 1845 as a means of increasing the Army at the time, and to bring back those regiments which had been so increased to their original state of one battalion. The reason for effecting that alteration was simply this—that such a mode of increasing the Army was not found to be on the whole a satisfactory method of increasing our forces, nor one which gave us all the efficiency which was required. The second battalions were in many instances far away from the first battalions—they were not provided with the necessary establishments; and in the state of their messes and other equipments there was a lack of the comforts which should be found in all the regiments of the service. In making the reductions, therefore, it appeared better to restore the regiments which had been thus augmented to the state of a single battalion, as before 1845, and to maintain the depôt system of 1825 in its integrity. With these observations, and with a briefer explanation than he would have given at a more favourable time, he would conclude by stating that, in order to maintain the reliefs which, according to the decision of the House were to be given to regiments serving abroad and in the colonies, the lowest force Her Majesty's Government could propose for the present year was 99,128 men, and he begged to place a vote for that amount in the hands of the Chairman.

§ MR. HUME
thought the right hon. Gentleman had stated sufficient reasons why they should take a further time for considering this vote, and for obtaining that explanation which the right hon. Gentleman had not time to give to-night—why so large a force was wanted. The right hon. Gentleman had declined to give that explanation in consequence of the lateness of the hour, though he had answered some parts of the speech of his (Mr. Hume's) hon. Friend the Member for the West Riding, which might well have been deferred until another opportunity. The proposition for a greater force this year than we had in 1834–5 required some explanation; and in order that they might obtain it, he would move that the Chairman report progress, and ask leave to sit again. He much regretted that they had gone into Committee at a time of night when no discussion could be taken. It was his intention, when the vote came to be discussed, to submit a definite Motion in regard to it, namely, to reduce the number of men to 90,000, being half the surplus of the present force over that of 1835; and he hoped, if they succeeded in that, to reduce by the other half next year. This was the vote upon which the whole of the other items of the military expenditure followed, and the House would not do their duty if they passed it without full consideration.

§ MR. FOX MAULE
regretted that his hon. Friend had not stated his intention before they went into Committee, because when he proposed to go into Committee, he understood his hon. Friend did not intend to object to the vote of the number of men. His hon. Friend required an explanation why it was necessary to maintain the number of men proposed. He was quite ready to give that explanation, provided his hon. Friend was willing at that late hour to stay and hear it. [Mr. HUME: Too late.] If his hon. Friend had said it was too late ten minutes ago, he should not have troubled the Committee with any observations.

§ MR. B. OSBORNE
did not think his hon. Friend the Member for Montrose was asking any great favour from the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary at War in requesting that there should be sufficient 619 time given for discussion upon the vote. The House was called upon to vote away no less than 6,000,000l., and when his hon. Friend asked for an adjournment, he was told by the right hon. Secretary of War, as it was only twenty minutes past twelve, they might as well hear his statement, and vote away at once those 6,000,000l. Now he (Mr. Osborne) did not think that exactly a respectable mode of voting away the money of the country. [Cheers.] He recognised amongst those loud cheers for the immediate vote the full tones of an ex-cavalry Officer; of course he was quite ready to vote for the Secretary at War. But he (Mr. Osborne) begged leave to tell his hon. and gallant Friend that he had an impression that a great reduction could be made in that particular arm of the service. [Laughter.] Yes, he maintained that there could be a very considerable saving effected in that arm, notwithstanding the ridicule which had been attempted to be cast upon the proposition of his hon. Friend the Member for the West Riding.

§ LORD J. RUSSELL
said, that if the Government had understood that it was the intention of the hon. Member for Montrose to make such a Motion, they would not have done more than propose that the House should go into Committee pro formâ, and his right hon. Friend the Secretary at War would not have troubled them with any statement. However, as the case now stood, he had no objection to the Chairman reporting progress, and asking leave to sit again on Monday.