§ House in Committee of Supply; Mr. Bernal in the chair.
748§ MR. FOX MAULEsaid, he had now, for the fifth time, to ask the House to vote the necessary sums to provide for the expenditure of the Army during the ensuing year. In former times considerable constitutional jealousy existed on the part of the House with reference to the standing army proposed to be maintained, but that feeling had been superseded by a very just feeling of national pride regarding the services, the conduct, and the discipline of the Army of this great country. He had no wish to disparage the troops of other countries, or exalt unnecessarily those of our own; but he would make bold to say that there was no army in the world more remarkable for its discipline, more patient under privation, more gallant in the assault, or more steady under fire, than the British Army. It was for the Government to state what, in their opinion, the number of men should be; but whatever opinions might be held upon this point, there was no economist near him who could bring forward or substantiate one single charge of bad discipline against the Army, or of failing to do their duty to the country when called upon. With respect to the strength of the Army, it was always the duty of the Government to keep the amount of force at what they considered the lowest possible point consistent with the exigencies and honour of the country; and it did not appear to his colleagues or himself that during the ensuing year they could propose, with any due regard to the public interest, that a smaller number of men should be maintained during the year ensuing than during that just past. He, therefore, should propose that the Committee should vote for the present year 98,714 men, being within 414 of the number voted last year. A reduction to a certain extent took place last year, but he was told on that occasion that it was partial, and confined to men in the ranks, and that the Government had not made a proportionate reduction in the number of officers. This year the decrease of 414 consisted of 101 officers, 25 non-commissioned officers, and 288 rank and file. Among that number would be found the office of Colonel-in-Chief of the 60th Regiment, which was filled by the late Duke of Cambridge, but which appointment, upon the recommendation of the Committee upstairs, had been abolished. The force of 98,714 men was distributed into two parts—the regiments who were serving at home, and those abroad. The force serving within these islands amounted to 59,598, while 749 39,116 were in the Colonies. One of the great arguments for keeping up an effective force at home was in order that a well-regulated system for relief to the soldiers serving abroad might be maintained. This principle was laid down several years ago by his predecessor (Mr. Sydney Herbert), and by the head of the last Government, and this improved system of relief, which had greatly reconciled the Army to serving abroad, he had endeavoured to maintain during his administration. By this means the term of service abroad had been reduced to ten years abroad, followed by five years at home, for the "inner service," as it was called; and to fifteen years abroad, and seven years and a half at home, for regiments serving in India and the more distant Colonies. The number of Her Majesty's troops in India was 30,497, and, although they were not included in the vote for 93,714 men, and although the House and the country did not pay for them, yet these regiments drew upon the system of relief. He maintained beyond this that it was reasonable the Government should have at their disposal for exigencies and for emergencies a certain amount of force, because, without running a race of military numbers with foreign Powers, it did not become this country, with such vast wealth to protect, and with such enormous interests at stake, to be altogether denuded of military force, and to be unprepared for any turn that affairs might take in foreign countries, and for the altered circumstances in which we were placed since the introduction of steam. The first vote being for the number of men, the second was for the maintenance of the Army, and this led him to state the amount of reductions made in the charge for the Army in consequence of the evidence taken before the Committee on the Army Estimates. In the first place, he proposed last year that the double battalion system should be done away with. To a great extent that reduction had been adopted, and a saving had accordingly boon effected in the reduction of the depôt battalions of 2,298l. The next saving was one in prospectu, being an allowance of 500l. a year, drawn by the late Adjutant General, the payment of which to the present Adjutant General would be discontinued whenever it should please his Grace the Commander-in-Chief to bestow the colonelcy of a regiment on that officer. Since the last estimates a change had been made in the department of the Quartermaster General, and a saving of 789l, per annum 750 had been made in the new arrangements. In the Army Medical Department the service had lost by the retirement, not, he was happy to say, by the death, of Sir James M'Grigor, an officer to whom the public were much indebted. In consequence of his retirement at the age of eighty-one, reductions had been effected in that department amounting to 1,085l. a year. In the Medical Staff of the Army the reductions made amounted to 1,414l. a year. The Committee upstairs went very largely into the question of the Staff in Canada, and the Government had been able to reduce five officers and some other expenditure, amounting altogether to 1,540l. a year. Then the office of Deputy Judge Advocate for Ireland had been discontinued, the saving thereby being 398l. a year. The whole saving that would be effected in consequence of the labours of the Committee on Army Estimates was 8,024l. The sum asked for on account of Vote No. 2 of these Estimates was last year 3,562,430l. This year (1851–52) the charge for the land forces was 3,521,069l., making a decrease of 41,361l. This decrease was spread over such a vast variety of small items that he would not detain the Committee by recapitulating them. But he would take this opportunity of noticing some of the special sums voted for certain Estimates in which the House of Commons took a very deep interest. The first was good-conduct pay, a system which was commenced under the warrant of his right hon. Friend (Mr. Sydney Herbert), and in which in the present Estimates there was an increase of 4,599l. It must always be satisfactory to every one who had the interest of the Army at heart to see this increase going on, for rely upon it that it would be far better economy to have an increase in this Vote for rewarding the good soldier, than be at the expense of finding means for punishing the bad. The next increase was in the lodging-money for married soldiers, in order to put an end to the practice of making the married and unmarried soldiers sleep in the same room in the barracks. Last year he proposed that each soldier who availed himself of the permission granted by his commanding officer should receive 1d. per day. Now, be was quite aware that this allowance was inadequate, and this year it had been doubled. Although 2d. a day seemed a small sum to provide a married soldier with a lodging out of the barracks, he felt quite 751 sure it would be found adequate for the purpose. And it would be found much more adequate if a hint thrown out recently by a military paper were adopted, and if philanthropic officers or gentlemen connected with the Army would enter into some arrangement, either by public company or otherwise, to construct model lodging-houses for the married soldiers. That would be one of the greatest boons that the soldiers could receive, and he believed that it would be a most excellent investment. The charge for lodging-money in the present estimates was 8,000l., being an increase of 4,000l. over last year. He now came to the subject of schools. He was happy to say that the schools for the Army were flourishing beyond his most sanguine expections. They were established in 1846 by his right hon. Friend (Mr. Sydney Herbert) under the Royal warrant, and they had gone on increasing in prosperity during the last five years. Students were first admitted to the normal school in 1847. The period of training was about two years. The first appointment was made in 1849, and since that period four garrison and 30 regimental schoolmasters had been appointed, with 13 assistant schoolmasters. At present there were 34 trained masters and 11 assistant masters in the regimental schools of the Army. And, although this was at first looked upon as an innovation, they could not now keep pace with the demand which was made upon them for schoolmasters for regiments; and he was happy to say that the thirst among the men for education was commensurate with the desire of the officers to provide it. The House was aware that steps had been taken by his Grace the Commander-in-Chief to ascertain the quantity of knowledge possessed by those who gained a commission in the Army, and that it had also been determined that an examination should take place until the officers took the rank of captain. But, at the same time, he must tell the House that he believed they would be called upon ere long to provide some means by which the officers of the Army would be enabled to obtain the quantity of knowledge which was required from them before they were allowed to hold the rank of captain. That examination was a severe one, although he did not think it was too severe; but it would be too severe if the House did not supply the officers of the Army with the means of obtaining the knowledge that was necessary. He saw no other way of accom- 752 plishing the object except by attaching to each regiment a captain without a company, who should be called the Captain of Instruction. If this was done, he believed that it would be the means of inducing the officers to devote a great deal more of their time to study than they did at present, and lead every officer to do his best to qualify himself for examination. The next item to which he had to call the attention of the House was also connected with the diffusion of knowledge in the Army—he meant the libraries. He was happy to state that an increase in the number of subscribers to the libraries had gradually been going on since the commencement of the scheme in 1840. There were now upwards of 100,000 volumes in the regimental libraries, and about 16,000 subscribers. The accounts of the regimental savings banks also, he was happy to say, tended to show the increased prosperity of the Army. In 1844 the number of depositors was 1,890, and the funds amounted to 14,849l. In 1850 the number of depositors was 7,859, and the funds amounted to 94,961l. These facts afforded a gratifying proof that the liberality of the House in promoting the interests of the Army was not thrown away; and he was quite sure that, however much the House was disposed to study economy in all the proper branches, they would never think of grudging what was necessary in this department. He now came to the third Vote, which was a Vote on account of the staff. He was happy to be able to state, that the reduction in this Vote came to within a few pounds of 5,000l. The decrease in the home staff amounted to 1,245l., the decrease on the staff abroad was 3,739l.—making together 4,984l. He now passed to the public departments, and here there was a slight increase of 63l. There was a total increase on the civil department of 1,911l., but that was balanced by a decrease in the military department of 1,848l., leaving, as he had said, a slight decrease of 63l. The Vote for the Royal Military College was much the same as last year, the increase being only 6l. The next Vote to which he would draw the attention of the House was that for the Royal Military Asylum and Hibernian School. In this there was also a small decrease of 641l., arising, not from any decrease in the efficiency of those institutions, but from the cheapness of provisions and other sources. The next Vote was for the yeomanry or volunteer corps. Upon 753 this there was a decrease of 16,000l. He was quite aware that some of his hon. and gallant Friends, eminent Members of this useful establishment, were rather angry with him because this Vote had been reduced so much; but he begged to tell them that they ought to "lay this flattering unction to their souls," that it was the greatest compliment that he could pay to that force, because the reduction arose solely and entirely from the circumstance that the force had been found in so perfect a state of order and discipline as to enable the authorities to dispense with their inspection oftener than once in two years. Those seven Votes were for the effective services of the Army. The whole expense of the effective services, in 1850–51, amounted to 3,936,582l. The estimated expense for the year 1851–52 was 3,873,666l., being a decrease of 62,916l. With the exception of the slight increase of 63l. for the Public Departments, and of 6l. for the Royal Military College, there was a decrease upon every other item. The next class of Votes was called Votes for the non-effective services. The first of these was the Vote for rewards to Officers for long services. In 1850–51 this Vote amounted to 15,112l. This year it amounted to 14,606l., showing a decrease of 506l. These rewards arose, as the House were aware, from the proceeds accruing from the vacancies in the old garrison appointments, two-fifths of which were apportioned as rewards for distinguished military services, and the other three-fifths went to the public Exchequer. The vacancies which had occurred during the year were rather considerable. They were Carisbrooke Castle, 173l.; Governor of Scarborough, 15l.; Governor of Berwick, 568l.; Garrison Quartermaster of Malta, 136l.; and a Lieutenant-Governor of Edinburgh Castle. The next Vote was that for the army pay of general officers. For 1850–1 there was required for this purpose the sum of 58,000l. This year there was required the sum of 52,000l., making a saving of 6,000l. Eighteen had been removed from the list; eight of these had died, and ten had got regiments. Two had made good claims to be placed upon the list; and, when speaking upon this Vote, he must be allowed to say, that the number of general officers receiving army pay had never been so low as at this moment. The Vote for the full pay of retired officers in 1850–51 was 54,500l. The sum asked this year was 52,500l., 754 showing a reduction of 2,000l. He now came to the half-pay. The Vote required for this purpose last year was 386,000l. This year it was 377,000l., being a reduction of 9,000l. He had stated to the Committee upstairs, and he would now repeat, that there was no branch of the public expenditure which the Secretary at War watched with greater vigilance than he did the half-pay list. He would show the Committee, when they came to discuss the individual Votes, the extent to which it had been reduced. He would content himself, however, with stating at present that during the past year 237 officers had died or been removed, and that 126 had been put on, making a reduction on the whole of 111 officers. Of course, after a certain period of active service, officers were entitled to a retirement, and it would be ungenerous to refuse them that boon; but, at the same time, he felt that for a considerable time to come this ought to be a decreasing Vote, and that the number of Officers on half-pay ought to bear a due and fair proportion to those who were maintained on full-pay. The next Vote was for foreign half-pay—a vote which of course would be eventually extinguished. For 1850–51 this vote was 42,200l., this year it was 38,993l., showing a decrease of 3,207l. During the year there had died 26 half-pay officers, 5 who had pensions for wounds, 3 widows, and 3 children, making in all 37 persons. Of course there would be no addition to the foreign half-pay. The Vote for Widows' pensions in 1850–51 was 126,536l. This year it was 122,717l., making a reduction of 3,819l. During the year 85 widows had been removed from the list, and 13 placed on; making a decrease of 72. The Vote for compassionate allowances in 1850–51, was 91,000l. This year it was 88,500l., making a decrease of 2,500l. The number of cases had decreased to the extent of 59. The next Vote had reference to the subject which they had been discussing that evening; he meant the Vote for Chelsea and Kilmainham Hospitals. The Vote for 1850–51 was 35,756l.; for this year it was 35,413l., being a reduction of 343l. The decrease on Chelsea was 480l., and the increase on Kilmainham 137l. The decrease here also arose from the difference in the price of provisions. He now came to what was always a large Vote—viz., the Vote for out-pensions. In 1850–51 the Vote amounted to 1,233,711l.; this year the sum required was 1,233,050l., 755 stowing a decrease, he was sorry to say, of only 661l. The number of out-pensioners who had died during the year was 677; the decrease on the charge was 6,242l., the increase 5,581l.,—difference, 661l. The increase arose as follows:—5,000l. less deducted for casualties, 70l. for staff officers in Australia; 500l. for organisation of pensioners in Canada; and 11l. for superintendent of black pensioners, making altogether 5,581l. The last Vote was superannuated allowances. In 1850–51 this Vote was 40,000l., this year it was 37,500l., making a decrease of 2,500l. On the non-effective services there was a decrease in every item; and the total decrease was 30,536l. The increase and decrease on the whole Estimates, as between this year and last, were as follows:—In 1850–51 the charge for the effective services was 3,936,582l.; in 1851–52 it was proposed to be 3,873,666l.; decrease, 62,916l. In 1850–51, the charge for the non-effective services was 2,082,815l. This year it was proposed to be 2,052,279l.; decrease, 30,536l. The total charge for both effective and non-effective services in 1850–51 was 6,019,397l.; for this year it was proposed to be 5,925,945l.; making a decrease of 93,452l. Next year, being Leap-year, the one day's extra pay would occasion an increase of 12,454l., otherwise the decrease would have amounted to 105,906l. Such was the general state of the Votes which he had to propose to the House. But he could not quit the comparison without noticing the comparison of the present year with that which his hon. Friend the Member for Montrose considered as the beau ideal of low Estimates—he meant the year 1835. He was happy to be able to state to his hon. Friend, that with a very much increased force, and taking into consideration the whole military expenditure, both for the Army and the Militia, the result was that there was a much smaller charge this year for the Army and Militia of the United Kingdom than there was in 1835.
| In 1835–6, cost of Army service | £5,907,782 |
| In 1835–6, cost of Militia service | 218,861 |
| Total | £6,126,643 |
| In 1851–2, cost of Army service | £5,925,945 |
| In 1851–2, cost of Militia service | 107,850 |
| Total | £6,033,795 |
§ Thus making a decrease, as compared with 1835–36, of 92,848l.; while, on the other hand, there had been an increase in 756 the force of 17,443, the number voted in 1835–36 having been 81,271, and the number proposed for this year 98,714, besides 29,000 veteran soldiers ready to come forward to defend their country when called upon. He thought it was a gratifying result that with due economy in all other branches the Government had been able in 1851 to show a decrease in the charge for the military services of the country, as compared with 1835–36, of 92,848l., and at the same time an increase of the force to the extent of 17,443, besides the large body of veterans he had referred to. He thought it only fair to ask the Committee to indulge him with a short statement of the result of the Army administration from 1847–48 to 1851–52 inclusive. It was so far fortunate, on comparing the first year that he had the honour of proposing the Army Estimates with the present, to find that the force in India was precisely the same. It was quite true that they had been different in the interims, some regiments having been sent home, as he thought, inconsiderately, because they had to be sent back the next year. The results were these:—
| Number of men, excluding India, 1847 | 108,398 |
| Number of men, excluding India, 1851 | 98,714 |
| Decrease | 9,684 |
| Effective charge, 1847 | £4,182,071 |
| Effective charge, 1851 | 3,873,686 |
| Decrease | £308,385 |
| Non-effective charge, 1847 | £2,175,227 |
| Non-effective charge, 1851 | 2,052,279 |
| Non-effective decrease | £122,948 |
| Effective decrease | 308,384 |
| Total decrease | £431,332 |
§ If they went through the number of entirely new charges which had been added during the last few years, it might swell the comparison to a much greater extent; but he forebore doing so. He only wished to show that wherever economy could be practised, the Government had been disposed to practise it, and that the result during his administration of the affairs of the Army had been such as the House had just seen. One word before he sat down with respect to the discipline of the Army. He was happy to state that, from whatever cause, whether from the increased rewards of good conduct or otherwise, the number of corporal punishments was steadily, he might say rapidly decreasing. In 1848 757 there were 520 punishments; in 1849, 475; in 1850, not including twenty-seven regiments which made no return, 241; and including those twenty-seven regiments upon the average of the rest, 330. This was very gratifying, and while he hoped that the House would never do away with the power of administering the punishment, he trusted that all that was possible would be always done to prevent its infliction. You might do away with the necessity of inflicting it by judiciously-applied rewards for good conduct and other similar moans. The last point to which he would refer was that of mortality in the Army, and he was happy to be able to state that, as a general fact, the mortality in the Army had of late very much decreased. During the prevalence, for example, of that most fatal disease, cholera, in Jamaica, while all the other portions of the population, white and black, fell victims to the malady in all directions, the military, owing to the precaution taken of fixing their barracks high up on the mountains, altogether escaped the pestilence. In reference to the army in Jamaica, he might here state, whereas for some years previous to 1836, when the sanitary regulations there were greatly improved, the proportion of mortality in the army was 128 per 1,000, the proportion had since fallen to 14 per 1,000. In fact, he might state that, with the exception of some two or three especially unhealthy localities, and of Canada and the East Indies, the mortality in the British troops abroad was not greater than it would be at home. Such was the report which he had to lay before the Committee, and he trusted it would be conceded that he had consulted economy to the fullest extent that was consistent with the service and dignity of the country, and the proper relief of our troops abroad. He had not scrupled, and never would scruple, to propose any increase of expenditure necessary for the welfare of the soldier; but at the same time he never would countenance unnecessary expense. He had weighed every item with the most scrupulous care, making reductions wherever reductions could be made, consistently with the public service, the national dignity, and the honour and character of that Army to which it had once been his pride to belong; an Army which he considered to be one of the very best in the world, and which, in peace or in war, was ever prepared to manifest its loyalty to the Sovereign and its devotion to the State.
758
§
Motion made, and Question proposed—
That a number of Land Forces, not exceeding 98,714 men (exclusive of the men employed in the Territorial Possessions of the East India Company), Commissioned and Non-Commissioned Officers included, he maintained for the Service of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, from the 1st day of April, 1851, to the 31st day of March, 1852, inclusive.
§ MR. HUMEwas gratified not less than the right hon. Gentleman at the economy which had taken place in the Army of late years. The economy had been of the most practical character, for they found that while the charges had decreased, the available force at the disposal of the country had been greatly increased. He had gone carefully over the returns of all the departments, and he was glad to perceive that in the system of accounts, as to correctness and character, the Army was far before the Ordnance or Navy—any comparison with the Navy being, in fact, quite out of the question. They had no doubt made considerable progress; but he was still not satisfied, and he only accepted what had been done as a proof of how much more could be accomplished. He saw no reason whatever why the civil organisation of the Army should not be still further improved. He saw no reason whatever why the Ordnance should not be placed, as in all other armies, under the Commander-in-Chief, in order that they might thus get rid of the expense of that costly and most useless establishment in Pall-mall, and save a clear million at least. He would not place reliance on the evidence, for it was interested, the witnesses being military men, who saw the advantage of the country in the increase of their establishments. The Governments successively had always urged that relief was wanted in the colonies, as the excuse for keeping up the numbers of the Army; and it seemed as if the same or an increased number was always to be required in the colonies. But changes had taken place of late in our colonial policy which should induce the House of Commons to change the system also; and the Government had admitted that the colonies should pay some part of the expenditure for military supplies. Formerly, in colonies with a mixed population, as in the West India islands, residence was not safe without a stationary military force, if only as police protection; but within the last few years Her Majesty's Government had determined, that whenever our colonists adopted the institutions 759 of this country, and had the management of their own affairs, they were to be made responsible for the expense of maintaining their military defence; and Earl Grey had said that they must be prepared to do so. If that were so, why delay placing them in the situation that would relieve this country of a large portion of its expenditure? Besides the 39,000 men specially demanded for the colonies, there were further some 40,000 artillery, engineer, ordnance, and sapper and miner troops employed in the East Indies and elsewhere: and, to a very large proportion of this number the principle intimated by Earl Grey in reference to the Australian troops might be gradually applied. The question was, had the country arrived at a point when they might demand a reduction in this large establishment, and whether the principle laid down by Earl Grey was to be acted upon? If 39,000 men were now required, it was a greater number than used to be wanted, and more than were required, although necessary when troops were wanted to coerce or keep down our colonies, or to keep out foreign aggression. At this time, when the reduction of the national expenditure was looked forward to, the colonies were among the sources which should be considered as aids to such reduction. The Australian Colonies had some 5,000 troops, and Earl Grey had given notice he should withdraw them. If that were so, why not a reduction in the estimate of the total number out there? Then there were the Canadas and North America. The Government had given responsibile government to Canada, and what was the use of keeping 8,000 or 9,000 troops there, or even 1,000 men? Why, if they were withdrawn directly, the inhabitants would probably not raise 1,000 men. He put it to the House whether, in such colonies as these, we ought to pay for troops only to act as police. If they wanted police, we ought not to be at the expense of maintaining the force we now do, and which is no longer wanted. He asked why Earl Grey and the Government, after the declarations he had mentioned, did not put them in force as regarded Canada and Nova Scotia, withdraw the troops, and leave them to find for themselves whatever was requisite? He should be glad to hear any plausible reason to the contrary. Without going back to 1835 as a precedent, but taking the average of three years, 1834, 1835, and 1836, and by comparing them with the present esti- 760 mates, the result would be that we voted 151,000 in place of 121,000 in round numbers. He should now appeal to the House to show their desire for practical reduction, and conclude by moving the reduction of the vote for 98,714 men by 5,000 men, who should be immediately withdrawn from the Colonies.
§
Motion made—
That a number of Land Forces, not exceeding 93,714 Men (exclusive of the Men employed in the Territorial Possessions of the East India Company), Commissioned and Non-Commissioned Officers included, be maintained for the Service of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, from the 1st day of April, 1851, to the 31st day of March, 1852, inclusive.
§ MR. W. WILLIAMS, in seconding the Amendment, must condemn the financial conduct of the Government as having been more extravagant in every branch of the public service than any of their predecessors. Unless the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary at War could show that there was something in the state of the country which required such a large force, he (Mr. Williams) did not think the House would be justified in voting the number of men which the right hon. Gentleman had proposed. The average of the eleven years from 1829 to 1839, had been much below what was proposed for this year. The average of these eleven years had been—of cavalry and infantry, 85,140 men; of artillery, 8,550, making together 93,690 men. There were proposed for this year, cavalry and infantry, 98,714; artillery, 14,570, together 113,284 men; being rather more than 20,000 men required this year above what had been the average required by the three Governments who had preceded the present Administration. Besides this, too, there had been an increase in the Irish police and the coast guard, amounting to 36,000 men, which, with the increase of 20,000 in the artillery, infantry, and cavalry, made the force asked by the Government for this year more than 56,000 above what had been required by the Governments of the Duke of Wellington, Earl Grey, and Lord Melbourne. He (Mr. Williams) must give the right hon. Gentleman credit for the clear and intelligible manner in which his Estimates were usually drawn up; but he should like very much that the right hon. Gentleman would point out what necessity existed for this increase of force. He (Mr. Williams) begged the House to observe that in the year 1839 this country was in a position 761 of considerable difficulty. Things were not at all tranquil at home, the rebellion in Canada was scarcely repressed, the difficulties existing with the United States in regard to the boundary question were not obviated, and our relations with France were not on the most satisfactory footing. Taking all these circumstances together, that period had been one of considerable difficulty; and if in such a period Government could do with the force he had mentioned, he did not see how the Secretary at War was justified in asking for such a large number of men for the present period. The noble Lord at the head of the Government had, in former days, entertained a very different notion as to the military force required in this country. He (Mr. Williams) would read a few lines which occurred in the noble Lord's Essay on the Constitution. The words were these:—
When it is urged that it is necessary to assimilate our peace establishment to that of Continental Powers, and that a large Army is rendered necessary by the increase of the population, then it is time for the people to arouse themselves and shake off, before it be too late, the burden of a military government.These words had been written by the noble Lord in the year 1823. Now, what had been the military force at that time? The Army had then numbered 74,000 men, so that the number asked this year exceeded by 40,000 that of the year 1823, when the noble Lord had put these opinions on paper. He (Mr. Williams) wished the noble Lord would carry out these principles, and take an example from the three Governments which had preceded the present Administration. All the circumstances of the country favoured the reduction of our military force. The railroads which now existed enabled the authorities to concentrate with ease the military at any given point, and of course did away with the supposed necessity which existed formerly to maintain such a large military force over the country. He was sorry that his hon. Friend the Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) had not proposed a much larger reduction than 5,000 men. For his own part, he saw no necessity for such an increase of men over what had been required by former Governments. Perhaps the Government could show some necessity for it. It had not, however, been done by the right hon. the Secretary at War. The right hon. Gentleman had referred to the year 1839; but he (Mr. Williams) could 762 tell him that the cost of the Army, Navy, and Ordnance, or, as they were generally termed, cavalry, infantry, and artillery, marines and sailors alone, had been 3,076,000l. more than the estimates of this year. ["Oh, oh!" and "Divide, divide!"] He thought that, on a subject of such importance, hon. Members should be allowed to express their opinions without interruption.
§ SIR W. MOLESWORTHsaid, he would confine himself to the proposal by his hon. Friend the Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) to reduce the military force of the colonies by 5,000 men. In the year 1835 a Committee of the House had been appointed to inquire into the colonial military expenditure of the country. That Committee was composed of Earl Fortescue, Sir Henry Hardinge, Sir Henry Barlow, and the hon. Member for Cocker-mouth, and they recommended that there should he the strictest economy observed in our colonial military expenditure. At that period the number of troops in the American colonies amounted to 5,399 men, including artillery and infantry, maintained at a cost of 337,000l. Since that period there had been an increase in the military force of our North American colonics, and also an increase in the expenditure. In 1846–7 the number of military in these colonics had been 9,743, and the expenditure had amounted to 645,000l. Last year the number of men and the expenditure had been nearly the same as in 1840–7. Since the year 1835, the increase of men in our North American colonics had been 4,374, and of expenditure 300,000l. If they came to the standard of 1835, they would consequently make a reduction of the men in the North American colonies to the extent of about 4,500, and a reduction in the expenditure of 300,000l. This increase in the military expenditure of the Canadas had been occasioned by the rebellion, which had cost this country 2,000,000l. [Mr. HUME: 5,000,000l.] His hon. Friend said 5,000,000l. They ought to recollect that the Canadas were now in a different position from what they had been when the increase had taken place. They had now obtained the uncontrolled management of their own affairs, and he must say that the policy latterly pursued towards these colonies had been most wise and judicious. He much approved of the surrendering to these colonies the management of the clergy reserves. He maintained, however, 763 that this country should not maintain troops in Canada for merely local purposes, especially as they had now the management of their own affairs. If some 4,000 troops were sufficient for the North American colonies in 1836, when they had not the management of their local affairs, he thought the number of troops now maintained in those colonies ought to be at once reduced. No doubt it was necessary for imperial purposes to have troops in particular stations—at Halifax and Quebec, for instance; but in 1835 the garrison of Quebec consisted of 1,100 men, and the garrison of Halifax of 1,500 men, and his hon. Friend (Mr. Hume) proposed to allow 4,000 men for these purposes. If we were to have a repeal of obnoxious taxes, there should be every possible reduction in our military expenditure; and any considerable reduction of our expenditure could only be made in our military establishments, and especially those connected with the colonies.
§ LORD J. RUSSELLIn reference to what has been said by the hon. Baronet (Sir W. Molesworth), I may state that the actual number of men in our North American colonies, including Newfoundland and Nova Scotia, is 8,079. The hon. Baronet proposes to reduce the number by 5,000, which would leave a totally inadequate force.
§ MR. MACGREGORsaid, he believed that we could not suddenly withdraw from the colonies 5,000 men, though at the same time he believed that the chief reduction in the Army must be from the forces in the colonies. He contended that, in the North American colonies, all that we required to maintain was merely a few companies at Quebec, Montreal, Upper Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, to serve, in case of need, as the framework to form regiments in those provinces. He did not think that they could, during this year, withdraw 5,000 men from the North American colonies, for the withdrawal of them would occupy a great portion of the year; and they could not withdraw them all at once, without throwing the men into a state of destitution. He would prefer leaving the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in the first instance, and afterwards the Secretary at War, to make those reductions. He had listened to the right hon. Gentleman's statement with great satisfaction, and he 764 believed that the accounts were kept in his office with very great correctness. But there was another field for economy in the Army. The great military establishments they kept up in Ireland were a satire upon the people of that country. He had much difficulty with regard to this Vote, and that was owing to our being called on to grant large sums of-money, while we had no Budget of ways and means. Government, by withholding a Budget, were keeping the country in suspense; trade was paralysed, and especially the shipping trade. He thought it would be wise in the Chancellor of the Exchequer to announce on Monday what he intended to do. The longer the right hon. Gentleman kept off making his statement, the greater injury he would do the country, and the more would he weaken the Government. He (Mr. Macgregor) thought that the best thing the Chancellor of the Exchequer could do, in the present state of the House of Commons, and in the condition of the Ministry, would be to attempt nothing more in his financial changes than to repeal the Window Tax entirely, and to renew the Income Tax for one year, having in view at the same time the greatest possible economy in the expenditure.
§ MR. HUMEsaid, in order to remove the difficulty which his hon. Friend felt with regard to the reduction, he would state that the recruiting was to the amount of 12,000 men a year, and if they stopped that they would accomplish the object. The House did not seem to be aware that this Vote involved a large expenditure for the Ordnance. Taking the five years from 1834 to 1838, inclusive, he found that the expense amounted to 61,274,159l. for Ordnance, Army, and Navy; while for the five years from 1846 to 1850, the amount was 84,524,659l., showing an excess of 23,250,500l. in the last five years, and an excess of 4,030,098l. in the expenditure of 1850 over the expenditure of 1835.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 47; Noes 186: Majority 139.
| List of the AYES. | |
| Alcock, T. | Cowan, C. |
| Bass, M. T. | Crawford, W. S. |
| Bell, J. | Duncan, G. |
| Blake, M. J. | Evans, Sir De L. |
| Bright, J. | Fagan, W. |
| Clay, J. | Fergus, J. |
| Corbally, M. E. | Fox, W. J. |
| Frewen, C. H. | Molesworth, Sir W. |
| Grace, O. D. J. | Morris, D. |
| Greene, J. | Mowatt, F. |
| Hall, Sir B. | O'Brien, Sir T. |
| Hastie, A. | O'Connell, J. |
| Henry, A. | Pigott, F. |
| Heywood, J. | Pilkington, J. |
| Heyworth, L. | Reynolds, J. |
| Hindley, C. | Scully, F. |
| Jackson, W. | Sullivan, M. |
| Keating, R. | Thompson, Col. |
| Kershaw, J. | Urquhart, D. |
| King, hon. P. J. L. | Wakley, T. |
| Lennard, T. B. | Walmsley, Sir J. |
| M'Gregor, J. | Williams, J. |
| Maher, N. V. | TELLERS. |
| Marshall, J. G. | Hume J. |
| Moffatt, G. | Williams, W. |
| List of the NOES. | |
| Abdy, Sir T. N. | Dundas, Adm. |
| Acland, Sir T. D. | Dundas, G. |
| Adair, R. A. S. | Dundas, rt. hon. Sir D. |
| Adderloy, C. B. | Dunne, Col. |
| Aglionby, H. A. | Ebrington, Visct. |
| Anson, hon. Col. | Edwards, H. |
| Archdall, Capt. M. | Estcourt, J. B. B. |
| Armstrong, Sir A. | Evans, W. |
| Armstrong, R. B. | Farrer, J. |
| Arundel and Surrey, Earl of | Ferguson, Sir R. A. |
| Fitz Patrick. rt. hn. J. W. | |
| Baines, rt. hon. M. T. | Foley, J. H. H. |
| Baird, J. | Fordyce, A. D. |
| Baring, H. B. | Forster, M. |
| Baring, rt. hn. Sir F. T. | Fortescue, C. |
| Barrington, Visct. | Freestun, Col. |
| Barrow, W. H. | Gallwey, Sir W. P. |
| Bellew, R. M. | Gaskell, J. M. |
| Berkeley, Adm. | Goddard, A. L. |
| Berkeley, hon. H. F. | Gooch, E. S. |
| Berkeley, C. L. G. | Goold, W. |
| Blair, S. | Gordon, Adm. |
| Booth, Sir R. G. | Gore, W. R. O. |
| Bowles, Adm. | Goulburn, rt. hon. H. |
| Boyle, hon. Col. | Graham, rt. hon. Sir J. |
| Brockman, E. D. | Greenall, G. |
| Buller, Sir J. Y. | Greene, T. |
| Bunbury, E. H. | Grenfell, C. W. |
| Burghley, Lord | Grey, rt. hon. Sir G. |
| Buxton, Sir E. N. | Grey, R. W. |
| Carew, W. H. P. | Grosvenor, Lord R. |
| Carter, J. B. | Guernsey, Lord |
| Cavendish, hon. C. C. | Gwyn, H. |
| Cavendish, hon. G. H. | Hallyburton, Lord J. F. |
| Charteris, hon. F. | Harris, R. |
| Chatterton, Col. | Hatchell, rt. hon. J. |
| Chichester, Lord J. L. | Hawes, B. |
| Childers, J. W. | Heathcoat, J. |
| Christy, S. | Heneage, G. H. W. |
| Clements, hon. C. S. | Henley, J. W. |
| Clerk, rt. hon. Sir G. | Herbert, H. A. |
| Clive, hon. R. H. | Herbert, rt. hon. S. |
| Cocks, T. S. | Hobhouse, T. B. |
| Coke, hon. E. K. | Hodgson, W. N. |
| Cowper, hon. W. F. | Hotham, Lord |
| Craig, Sir W. G. | Howard, hon. C. W. G. |
| Dalrymple, Capt. | Howard, P. H. |
| Dawson, hon. T. V. | Hudson, G. |
| Dodd, G. | Jones, Capt. |
| Douglas, Sir C. E. | Kildare, Marq. of |
| Duckworth, Sir J. T. B. | Knox, hon. W. S. |
| Duke, Sir J. | Labouchere, rt. hon. H. |
| Duncuft, J. | Lewis, G. C. |
| Lindsey, hon. Col. | Seymour, Lord |
| Lockhart, A. E. | Sibthorp, Col. |
| Long, W. | Simeon, J. |
| Lygon, hon, Gen. | Smith, J. A. |
| Mackie, J. | Smollett, A. |
| Macnaghten, Sir E. | Somers, J. P. |
| Matheson, A. | Somerville, rt. hn. Sir W. |
| Matheson, Sir J. | Spearman, H. J. |
| Matheson, Col. | Spooner, R. |
| Maule, rt. hon. F. | Stafford, A. |
| Miles, P. W. S. | Stanford, J. F. |
| Miles, W. | Stanley, E. |
| Milner, W. M. E. | Stansfield, W. R. C. |
| Mitchell, T, A. | Stanton, W. H. |
| Mostyn, hon. E. M. L. | Stuart, J. |
| Mulgrave, Earl of | Start, H. G. |
| Mundy, W. | Tancred, H. W. |
| Newdegate, C. N. | Tenison, E. K. |
| Noel, hon. G. J. | Thicknesse, R. A. |
| Norreys, Lord | Thompson, Aid. |
| Ogle, S. C. H. | Thornely, T. |
| Owen, Sir J. | Townshend, Capt. |
| Paget, Lord C. | Trevor, hon. G. R. |
| Pakington, Sir J. | Tufnell, rt. hon. H. |
| Palmer, R. | Turner, G. J. |
| Palmerston, Visct. | Tyler, Sir G. |
| Parker, J. | Vane, Lord H. |
| Patten, J. W. | Verner, Sir W. |
| Pennant, hon. Col. | Verney, Sir H. |
| Power, N. | Watkins, Col. L. |
| Rawdon, Col. | Wellesley, Lord C. |
| Reid, Col | Westhead, J. P. B. |
| Ricardo, O. | Williamson, Sir H. |
| Rice, E. R. | Wilson, J. |
| Rich, H. | Wilson, M. |
| Romilly, Col. | Wood, rt. hon. Sir C. |
| Russell, Lord J. | Wrightson, W. B. |
| Russell, F. C. H. | Wynn, H. W. W. |
| Sandars, G. | Wyvill, M. |
| Scrope, G. P. | TELLERS. |
| Seaham, Visct. | Hayter, rt. hon. W. G. |
| Seymer, H. K. | Hill, Lord M. |
§ Original Question put, and agreed to.
§ MR. HUMEprotested against proceeding further that night, it being now a quarter past twelve o'clock. He should move that the Chairman report progress.
§ MR. FOX MAULEsaid, the 5th of April was fast approaching, and although they might have money in hand for the present year, that money, very properly, could not be applied to the expenditure of the ensuing year. He hoped his hon. Friend would now allow the Votes to be taken.
§ MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he wished to show the injustice of several of the items, and especially with regard to the differences of rank. He wished to go into detail. ["Oh, oh!"] He had a duty to perform, and he should not be prevented from performing it by clamour.
§ MR. MOWATTsaid, he had an additional reason why the question should not be further debated that evening. It appeared evident that the House was not disposed to enter upon such a discussion 767 as many Members might desire. For instance, he had the presumption to think that he could himself show that a reduction of more than 5,000 men in the Army, so far from impairing its efficacy, would render good service to the colonies, for the sake of which it was pretended that our military establishment was kept up on its present footing. ["Divide, divide!"] As the House was not prepared to listen to any man, he should support the Motion for reporting progress.
§ MR. FOX MAULEsaid, that if the hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. Williams) would take the trouble to read the evidence given before the Committee last year, he would find every explanation that he could require, not only given in a far better manner than he could do, but illustrated by documents from the War Office. He hoped the House would consent to the Vote.
§ MR. WILLIAMSprotested against the voting of 3,500,000l. after midnight.
§ Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do report progress, and ask leave to sit again."
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 29; Noes 168: Majority 139.
§ MR. HUME moved that the Chairman "do now leave the chair." If he could get any one to support him, he would stay there till four o'clock in the morning, dividing the Committee, rather than permit the people's money to be voted away at such an hour (twenty minutes to one o'clock).
§ LORD J. RUSSELLsaid, that the lion. Member being so inflexible in his determination, he (Lord J. Russell) had nothing for it but to acquiesce. He would, therefore, offer no further opposition to the adjournment; but he should feel it his duty to propose, that on Monday evening Supply should have precedence of all other Orders. This would necessarily interfere with the arrangements he had previously made, and he should be compelled, in consequence, to postpone the Motion of which he had given notice, for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the relations of this country with the Kaffir and other tribes on our South African frontier. He must, however, be permitted to say that he thought the conduct of the hon. Member for Montrose very unreasonable.
§ MR. HUMEwished the noble Lord to understand that it was his intention to move, on Monday evening, that unless Government brought forward their financial 768 statement, the House should not even go into Committee of Supply. There was a business-like mode in which to do things, and it ought to be observed. The House ought not to be trifled with. Nobody had of late years heard of such a thing as voting large sums of money after midnight; and he, for one, must protest against it. A minority had rights as well as a majority; and it was not to be endured that they should be forced into compliance by what some would designate (though he did not so designate it) as "a tyrannical majority."
§ MR. ADDERLEYsaid, the question for which he had given notice for a Select Committee to inquire into, was most essential to the interests of the empire. It need not be a long question, or require a long debate. He should have brought it on to-day, but the noble Lord at the head of the Government asked him to give way, assuring him that he should bring it on the first thing on Monday; and he acceded to the request out of deference to the noble Lord. The discussion on the Budget would be coming on, and he should like to know whether he would be allowed to refer the subject to a Committee before going through the Supplies.
§ LORD J. RUSSELLsaid, it was quite right that the hon. Gentleman should receive an explanation. According to the Orders of the House, after an amendment had been put and divided upon, no other resolution could be proposed; the only Motion that could be put was, that the Speaker should leave the chair. The Speaker himself had decided so that night, in reference to the Motion of the hon. Member for Lincoln (Colonel Sibthorp), which stood before that of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Adderley). Therefore it was impossible that his Motion could come on. He certainly intended to have proceeded on Monday, before any other business, with the Estimates. The hon. Gentleman would see the position in which the House stood. On the 5th of April any monies that might remain, not having been paid in the expenses of the year, would be returned to the Exchequer. Therefore, unless the House now consented to vote certain sums, there would not be, on the 5th April, any money for the emergencies of the service. As the hon. Member for Montrose knew that, he hoped he would not persevere in his opposition.
§ MR. HUMEsaid, that to show what he intended to do, he would state that he meant to put on the books a notice, before 769 going into Committee of Supply, that the House would not grant any further supplies until the financial statement was made.
§ MR. BRIGHTsaid, he was not at all certain that the opinion of the course pursued by the hon. Member for Montrose, being very unreasonable, would be participated in out of doors. Generally speaking, the public impression was, that if any part of the business of that House was done in a slovenly, unsatisfactory manner, it was the voting of large sums of money. It might be all very well that this money should be voted in the sums now proposed; but it certainly did not appear right to those paying the taxes that those sums should be voted without consideration and inquiry. The noble Lord at the head of the Government ought not to lay all the blame on the hon. Member for Montrose of the interruption to public business. He had kept the House himself, ever since the 4th of February, running after a hare which they would never catch, and trying to do that which was wholly impossible. And if the public were favourable to the noble Lord's project, they must be ready to submit to some little inconvenience with regard to the rest of the busines. If there was any occasion on which it was necessary to make some stand, and demand some inquiry and discussion, it was in voting these large sums of money; for it was only in these large Votes for Naval and Military expenditure that it was possible to secure for the country any reduction of expenditure.
§ House resumed.
§ Resolution to be reported To-morrow, at Twelve o'clock; Committee to sit again on Monday next.
§ The House adjourned at a quarter before Two o'clock.