HC Deb 05 June 1857 vol 145 cc1251-75

House in Committee. Mr. FITZROY in the Chair. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £462,453, be granted to Her Majesty (in addition to the sum of £231,000 already voted on account), towards defraying the charge of Civil Buildings and Barracks at Home and Abroad, which will come in course of payment from the 1st day of April, 1857, to the 31st day of March, 1858, inclusive.

CAPTAIN VIVIAN

said, it was his intention to take the sense of the Committee whether the Government should have £100,000 more to spend upon the erection of barracks at Aldershot. He could not conceive what the hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. W. Williams) was about in suffering such large sums of money to be voted for these barracks. He was of opinion, that it was not expedient to erect barracks there at all. For all purposes of military instruction the camp at Chobham was more effective and much less costly than Aldershot. At Chobham the men were, to a great extent, under canvas. In addition to brigade and division drill, they learned to erect and strike their tents, to drain the camp, and to make roads. The cavalry soldier learned to picket his horses. He never could find out who selected Aldershot as the situation of a camp; every one repudiated it. It had been laid to Lord Hardinge's charge, but that gallant nobleman had also repudiated it. When it was selected, however, engineers were sent down; huts were erected at an expense of £100,000, drains and roads were made, and the troops when they arrived were marched—he would not say into luxurious barracks, because the huts were about as bad as they could be for the money—but into huts instead of into a camp, and, except their brigade and division drill, they learned nothing. Not content with building huts, however, the Government were now erecting large and luxurious permanent barracks in which the soldiers would positively and literally learn nothing. They might learn to cook by gas, and to wash by steam; for he believed that both those processes were to be introduced—but as to their duties in the field, cooking their own meat, washing their own clothes, making-roads, draining their camp, erecting and striking their tents, and picketing their horses, they would learn nothing. If we were to reduce our army to a peace establishment, what did we want with extra barracks? It might be said that the day might come when we should require them; but it was much easier to find accommodation for 10,000 men by means of billets and tents than to find 10,000 men, and he believed that by sending young soldiers to Aldershot we should disgust them with their profession and render it more difficult to obtain recruits. As regarded morals, too, Aldershot being so near London was by no means a good situation for a camp. He objected to that camp on strategical and economical grounds, and also as a matter of policy. It had a tendency to prevent that which was necessary for our army—the establishment of a system of camps. He was firmly convinced, that after the extravagant Votes for that folly at Aldershot, the House of Commons, if asked for a sum of money for a camp in the neighbourhood of London during the summer, would laugh at the demand. He should therefore be glad if a majority of the Committee would support his Amendment to reduce the sum to be expended for permanent barracks from £100,000 to £50,000; and next year he should propose a Committee of inquiry into the military system at Aldershot. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £412,453, be granted to Her Majesty (in addition to the sum of £231,000 already voted on account), towards defraying the charge of Civil Buildings and Barracks at Home and Abroad, which will come in course of payment from the 1st day of April, 1857, to the 31st day of March, 1858, inclusive.

SIR FREDERICK SMITH

said, he wished to explain to the Committee that the barracks in question consisted of three divisions—one for infantry, another for cavalry, and the third for artillery. Two of those barracks would be completed by Christmas, and if the money were granted the third would be completed by the spring of next year. Any one acquainted with the erection of large buildings knew that a considerable increase of cost was occasioned by arresting the progress of their structure. The original intention was to have permanent barracks at Aldershot, and camps and tents occasionally for the accommodation of large bodies of men, who might there be instructed in brigade and divisional service. The establishment at Aldershot also enabled the Government to place there the embodied militia for the purpose of instruction in pitching and striking their tents and other duties. Complaints had been made to the Government of the detriment to discipline caused by the billeting of the militia in different towns, and arrangements were made to locate the militia in different garrisons; but as those garrisons got filled it was found necessary to have recourse to another system. The hut cantonment was hit upon, and if the war had continued the huts would have been filled by militia learning their duties and becoming efficient to fill up the vacancies in the regular army. He believed that during; the war 30,000 militiamen volunteered for the army from Aldershot. The hut cantonment was formed for receiving the militia regiments which could not other wise be provided for. There was no doubt that the present barracks at Aldershot were expensive in point of construction; but they were constructed on the recommendations of a Committee of that House, who laid it down that it was necessary to give more room to the men and the horses in all new barracks. He believed, however, that they would be found very substantial. During the time he was at Aldershot the Medical Returns showed that less mortality and sickness occurred there than in any other barracks in the world. Therefore great good had resulted from the establishment at Aldershot, and he believed the completion of the barracks to be a matter of sound policy.

SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY

said, he should support the Amendment solely on financial grounds, leaving the military and political questions at issue to be discussed by those hon. Members who better understood it. During the last two years £4,700,000 had been voted for naval and military works, and £6,000,000 in the last three years. £690,000 had been voted during the last two years for buts—namely, £175,000 in one year, and £516,000 in the last year. He wished to know whether these sums had been expended, and where? They were exclusive of the money voted for the Crimean huts, £140,000, and the money for the huts at Heligoland. Last year the total cost of permanent barracks at Aldershot was stated in the Estimate at £250,000. In the Estimates of the present year, however, the total cost was raised to £400,000, being a positive increase of £150,000 upon the Estimates, after £250,000 had been obtained from Parliament on the under-Standing that it was to be the entire cost of their erection. He found that £254,000 had been already expended on those barracks, and that £124,000 more was wanting, making the sum to be expended on that establishment £378,000. He should like to know when those expenses were to end. Did the country mean to lay out £500,000 on the present barracks at Aldershot? He considered that no course on the part of the Government could be more unfair than to begin with a low Estimate, and then to go on increasing it from £250,000 to £520,000, which it would be next year. He should vote for the reduction proposed in the Vote, in the hope of putting an end to such extravagant expenditure of the public money; and also, because he believed that the troops could not be taught so well in barracks as in a camp. Bearing in mind that £690,000 had been already spent in barracks, he thought the question ought to be seriously entertained, otherwise nothing could prevent an increase of taxation if such expense were persevered in.

MR. DRUMMOND

said, the real thing to be looked for was this—that there should be some one man with a name to him who should be responsible for these things. Who was to blame for the waste of money on the Houses of Parliament? Nobody; simply because they had a Committee here and a Committee there, managing the affair, and never got the right man. The same was likely to be the case with the new Government offices. Money was voted on account, and the House never knew how it was expended, nor who was responsible for it. The most frightful mistakes had been made in the drainage of Aldershot, in the first instance, and then it turned out that there was no water. Then they began to complain that they had no water, and they got £10,000 more for it. With respect to Aldershot, in fact, there had been no proper plan from the beginning. So little did Secretaries for War appear to profit by experience, that only last November he had been informed that some cavalry regiments upon their arrival at Aldershot, found nothing prepared to receive them. They were for three days and nights without shelter, and the result was, the old Crimean story—the men got dysentery and the horses died. The demoralisation in the vicinity of the camp was dreadful to contemplate. It appeared to be a sort of cesspool of immorality containing all the worst characters from the metropolis; and he had heard officers say that it would ultimately be impossible to preserve discipline, unless the further expense was incurred of building a wall around the whole camp. [Laughter.) Hon. Gentlemen might laugh, but he would venture to prophesy that within a year or two an Estimate would be laid before the House for that purpose. In fact, he thought that he had seen persons already preparing such an Estimate, by whose authority he knew not, perhaps by no authority. What, however, he wished most particularly to impress upon the Committee was, the expediency of not voting one shilling of the present Estimate without clearly knowing who was responsible for its outlay.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

Sir, the hon. and gallant Member for Bodmin (Captain Vivian), and the hon. Member for West Surrey (Mr. Drummond), have expressed a great desire to know who is responsible for the establishment at Alder-shot, and I will tell them in a few words. I consider myself principally responsible. Now, so far from its being true, as the hon. and gallant Member for Bodmin has been informed, that the late Lord Har-dinge repudiated the establishment at Aldershot, I am able to state from my own personal knowledge that no one was more anxious for its establishment. At the time the land at Aldershot was purchased, I had the honour of being Secretary of State for the Home Department, and Lord Hardinge and myself co-operated together, and used to have frequent meetings in order to make arrangements for the military defence of the country, and I can assure the Committee that no man was more anxious for the purchase of that land than Lord Hardinge, and no man felt more strongly the great value it would be in improving the discipline and efficiency of the British army. As far, therefore, as responsibility goes, I am quite ready to take it upon myself, because I had a great share in persuading the Treasury to agree to the purchase of that land. It is said by some, that a camp like that at Chobham was a better system, and that we should confine ourselves to camps of that nature; but to continue that system is totally impossible. We are not to suppose that a Government can go to-morrow, or next day, or next year, or whenever they please, and find a space of ground unenclosed and adapted for assembling large bodies of men for the purpose of instructing them in military evolutions. Why, we all know that those great spaces of land are being enclosed. Chobham has been enclosed, and most probably Aldersbot would have been enclosed before now if Government had not purchased it. The purchase was made upon most advantageous terms, the price being, I think, about £13 an acre, and since that period the land has so much increased in value, that if at any future period the Government should deem it no longer expedient to continue the occupation of that land, they would be able to sell it at an infinitely larger sum than that which it originally cost. I say again that I, among others, am responsible for the purchase of the land at Aldershot, and for the system of military instruction which it was intended to establish, and I am satisfied, from what I have seen, that we judged rightly in determining upon that purchase, for I believe that nothing has been done of late years which has had a greater tendency to increase the efficiency of the army. I have been asked, on more than one occasion, whether it was originally intended that any permanent barracks should be established. Why, Sir, undoubtedly it was. Aldershot is not only a place where large bodies of troops can be assembled to be instructed in the performance of military evolutions, but it is, from its position, of vast strategical importance, with a view to the defence of the country; and if it should ever unfortunately happen that we are compelled to move troops for the defence of the country, the fact of having a large body of men assembled at Aldershot would be found of the greatest possible advantage. Aldershot is in a central position, it has means of communication by railroads with all parts of the country, it is easily accessible from London, and it is within easy communication with Portsmouth, Dovor, and Plymouth, and all those points upon which we might wish to collect troops, and therefore I say that in a strategic point of view, Aldershot is of immense value. It was, then, the original intention that permanent barracks should he established for the accommodation of about 4,000 infantry, 1,500 cavalry, and a few batteries of artillery, and I maintain that so far from the expenditure which has been incurred having been an improvident expenditure, the money has been exceedingly well laid out for the service of the country. It is true that these barracks may have cost more to build than those which we have hitherto been accustomed to construct, but that is owing to the recommendation of a Committee of this House which was appointed to consider the accommodation which ought to be afforded to officers and soldiers in providing places of amusement and instruction, separate accommodation for married men, and other conveniences. With regard to the salubrity of Aldershot, the hon. Member for West Surrey (Mr. Drummond) has drawn a picture, and said that an occurrence had taken place there similar to occurrences which took place in the Crimea. Now, I think that the hon. Gentleman must be very much mistaken in supposing that cavalry regiments were exposed without shelter, and that the result was such as he has described. I can only say that Aldershot is one of the healthiest stations in the United Kingdom, and so far from its being objectionable on that score, its salubrity is one of its greatest recommendations. Then, again, as regards the question of morality, I do not mean to say that the assembling together of large bodies of troops will not also collect together a number of idle and immoral persons, but this I will say, that the morality of the troops in camp is much better eared for than when they are billeted in towns; and that so far from collecting troops in barracks being an immoral system, it is as conducive to good conduct as to good discipline. What we intend to do is, to assemble in the summer large bodies of troops at Aldershot, consisting probably chiefly of the militia, one body after another, in order that they may practise those military evolutions which they would have to perform if called into the field. Well, then, the hon. and gallant Member for Bodmin complains that the men are quartered in huts, and thus are prevented gaining experience in pitching tents. Now, I have seen that practice going on, for I remember, a short time since, seeing a rifle battalion engaged in pitching tents. It is not, however, a very difficult art to acquire, and I think that it is only necessary that one regiment should be taught it at a time. Then again, with regard to cooking, no doubt that is a matter of considerable importance; but the subject of paramount importance at Aldershot is to teach a large body of men to perform military evolutions on a large unequal surface of ground, and that object the nature of the ground at Aldershot fully enables them to accomplish. Then, again, an hon. Gentleman has complained that the huts were put up at Aldershot, because at the end of the war we had a number of huts we did not know what to do with, and therefore we sent them to Aldershot; but the hon. Gentleman ought to remember that the huts at Aldershot were erected during the war, and not after its termination, and certainly no huts were brought back from the Crimea, so that there can be no foundation for that hypothesis. I hope the Committee will not allow itself to be run away with by declarations about the dulness of Aldershot, by statements that the officers do not like to be there, that they have not the same amusements they have in large towns, that they prefer Dovor, or Portsmouth, or Plymouth. Let not the Committee run away with the notion that money will be wasted by the completion of these barracks. The subject is one of the utmost importance as regards the efficiency of the army; and I maintain that nothing has been done for a number of years so well calculated to render the British army efficient as the purchase of Aldershot and the arrangements attendant I thereupon. This House has ever been anxious to make the army efficient; it has from time to time insisted upon a military education being given to the officers of the army. It has been said, that though the army was brave and heroic, and ready to plunge into any danger, it was deficient in experience in those matters which constituted military science; and when the Committee attach so much importance to the efficiency of the army, I trust it will not listen to any proposal which will have the effect of striking a blow at that efficiency, and will prevent the completion of arrangements for placing it on a footing in a time of peace which will enable it to do its duty during a period of war. I have stated on a former occasion that we are the only great Power in Europe, possessing an army of any considerable amount, which has not been in the habit of having recourse to those assemblages of troops for military instruction. The Governments of Foreign Powers are, however, obliged from time to time to hire ground for that purpose at a considerable expense. Now, if we had not Aldershot, if we were obliged to hire ground, the cost would be greater than the House of Commons would be likely to sanction, while on the other hand, the arrangements of Aldershot are not only cheap to the public in comparison with the advantage to the country, but they afford the means of giving an effi- ciency to the army—both to officers and privates—which without some such arrangements it could never obtain.

MAJOR STUART WORTLEY

said, he did not believe that the hon. and gallant Member for Bodmin objected so much to the purchase of the ground at Aldershot as to the circumstance that our troops at that establishment were about to be provided with permanent barracks, instead of being lodged in tents. The huts which had been erected there had cost a sum of between £600,000 and £700,000, and he believed they were found to be leaky, and fast going to decay. He could not help feeling that, although the construction of the proposed barracks had already been commenced, yet it was better the works should be stopped than that the country should be saddled with a permanent location—he could not call it a camp—at Aldershot. He deemed it for these reasons to be his duty to support the Amendment for reducing the Vote to £50,000, and he might add that he could not help thinking that our soldiers could not learn their profession sufficiently well at Aldershot to fit them for service in the Cape Colony or the other important points of military occupation abroad. It was of the utmost importance that the troops should be thoroughly skilled in cooking and other minor matters of military education, as otherwise they would never be able to operate with the necessary efficiency in the field.

MR. SIDNEY HERBERT

Sir, I shall certainly give my support to the proposal of the Government in respect to this Vote. The first encampment established in this country within the recollection of the present generation was that which existed at Chobham. Public opinion had not previously been directed to the deficiencies of our army, and our troops were afforded very few opportunities of acting together in large masses; When I, as Secretary at War, therefore proposed that there should be a military encampment, the doctrine which I advocated, of the expediency of having the various regiments of the army brought together in divisions and brigades, was very much questioned, upon the ground of the expense which the carrying of that doctrine into practical operation would entail upon the country. Economy was at that time the order of the day, and efficiency was but little regarded in comparison. During the war a different state of things prevailed, but we may now perceive again a tendency to revert to economy. I must confess I am myself a great advocate for economy in matters such as that under our notice; but I feel bound to consider how far we should be consulting that principle by lopping off a sum of £50,000 from this Vote, and spoiling the whole of our plan, after the great expense to which we have gone with the view of securing the efficiency of our troops. It is proposed on the part of the Government to construct permanent barracks at Aldershot, but I apprehend that, in seeking to carry out that object, it is not their intention to do away with the system of having masses of troops encamped there during the summer months. I certainly think an error was committed in keeping a large body of soldiers there during the past winter, because the inclemency of the season tended to disgust the officers and men with those duties the discharge of which would in summer be a recreation, and would imbue them with a love of their profession. It was, however, I maintain, necessary to purchase the ground at Aldershot. The extent to which land is enclosed in England accounts for the circumstance that it is not easy to find an open space which is well supplied with water, and which in other respects is not open to objection. I believe the erection of permanent barracks at Aldershot to be a necessary step—and for this reason, that there is not at present in England a sufficient amount of barrack accommodation for our troops. When the Committee examines into the details of that accommodation, they will, I think, be surprized at the sanitary considerations which it will present to their view. Those who enter our army are picked men, in the prime of life, their period of service ranging from twenty to thirty years of age; they are examined by a medical man, and must, before their admission into the service, be reported free from malformation, and all tendency to disease. How comes it to pass, then, that among that class of men the mortality is greater than among those of the same age in civil life? There must be some reason to account for the circumstance, and one good one, in my opinion, is that they are generally badly housed. Well, the Government propose to construct permanent barracks at Aldershot, by which that objection will, to some extent, be met, and I cannot understand why the erection of these barracks should prevent them from bringing together other regiments besides those to which permanent accommodation is to be afforded, with the view of enabling as large a number of troops as possible to go through the evolutions which have been described as so necessary for the efficiency of the service. I must say that I hope greater care will in future be taken to instruct our soldiers in those minor points of military education in which they are so extremely deficient. Not one among them, unless he happens to have learned the trade of a glazier, or to have come from the bogs of Ireland, or the Highlands of Scotland, where men must more or less shift for themselves, knows how to put in a pane of glass in a window, or to accomplish any of those small contrivances in the way of cooking and hutting, which are of so much use to an army in the field. For these reasons I should be glad to see more of the work at Aldershot done by the troops themselves. You cannot, it is true, create an efficient commissariat in time of peace. I do not believe that that can be done until the second or third year of war. No man in his senses would dream, in the present state of England, of marching a regiment of troops from one quarter of the country to another with a Commissariat in its rear, going into every farmyard and purchasing its contents, when they might get the necessary provisions by contract with half the trouble and at half the price. Artificial difficulties, however, in every other way may be created, which it is desirable that the troops should be taught to overcome. 1 may add that, as I have always attached the utmost importance to the massing of troops together in divisions and brigades, I should like to see that system carried into effect; but I, at the same time, feel it my duty to warn the Government not to proceed to too great a length in that course, for if they do, they may produce a revulsion in public opinion against it. In conclusion, I have only to say that, deeming the original purchase of the ground at Aldershot to be a wise proceeding, and the erection of the proposed barracks to be economical, for here you have got the site, whereas, elsewhere you must purchase it, I shall give my support to the Vote under the consideration of the Committee.

LORD ADOLPHUS VANE-TEMPEST

said, he should support the Motion for the reduction of the Vote, because he believed the principle which this Vote carried, was completely antagonistic to the promotion of that, efficiency in the army of which the right hon. Gentleman who had just spoken was so distinguished an advocate. The Vote in question was for the purpose of making a permanent barrack at Aldershot. Now, this was destroying the very advantage obtained by sending soldiers to camp, by instituting a system that provided them with permanent shelter, and prevented the opportunity of teaching soldiers the valuable knowledge of shifting for themselves. He would appeal to any of the officers or visitors to the Crimea whether when the men were left to their own resources they did not manage much better for themselves than when they were supported by the "paternal rule" at home. He hoped that the hon. and gallant Member for Westminster (Sir De L. Evans) would tell the Committee whether the houses built by the soldiers in the Crimea were not far better I than the Government huts sent from home. The British soldier had plenty of resources, if practised in developing them, but the Government were so unpopularizing the service that it was no wonder they had been compelled to confess in the face of Europe that the service contained 50,000 men below the estimate voted by Parliament. There was at present, he understood, a great difficulty in obtaining recruits, and if we were at war to-morrow the same difficulty would still be felt. The service could not fail to be unpopular so long as the Government acted upon the principle of playing at soldiers, and sent them to a permanent nuisance like Aldershot, which "bored" not only officers, but men. If the men were really being educated in campaigning, as they would be, if sent for six weeks annually to lead a real camp life, and be instructed in all its details, they would go through the necessary inconveniences good-humouredly; but I to keep them for lengthened periods, and throughout the year at Aldershot, merely for reviews, and for what the noble Lord at the head of the Government called great evolutions, would, he did not hesitate to affirm, disgust the soldier with the service. He would say nothing of the officer, because he must do his duty whenever and wherever he was called upon. But, he felt confident if the system was pursued of keeping men the whole year round in camp for the sake of this expensive toy, the Government would find increased difficulties in filling the ranks. Why should the Government go to an expense of £500,000 in order to destroy whatever practical use was to be derived from Aldershot as a camp? He should vote for the reduction of the Vote, and he only regretted that the Motion did not go to the refusal of the Vote altogether.

MR. TITE

said, that having been a Member of two Committees which had instituted inquiries on the subject of the Vote now under consideration, he could state that the sum given for the land at Aldershot was extremely small considering its extent. It had been explained by many eminent Officers that it was necessary to have a large unoccupied extent of country for the education of the troops, and the land, if now resold, was worth a great deal more than had been given for it. It was true that some mistakes had been made at first, for the huts were covered with felt, which was too liable to decay to be a good roof. Then, it was said, and he had himself believed at one time, that there had been great jobbing in the contracts at Aldershot. Having, however, served upon the Committee on Government contracts, he felt bound to say that nothing could be more fair or more just to the nation than the system upon which those contracts had been given. They were thrown open to public competition; they were taken by respectable parties at a fair price, and the Government had satisfactorily defended themselves from the accusations made against them. Of course, if the contracts were broken and the works were stopped, they could only be resumed at a great sacrifice of time and money. He must therefore give his vote in support of the Government on the present occasion.

MR. HENLEY

said, what he had to complain of was, the very inconvenient mode in which barracks, land, and buildings were lumped together in the Vote. The Committee had also a right to complain of the mode in which the question of the hon. Member for West Surrey (Mr. Drummond) had been met and answered by the noble Lord at the head of the Government. That question was how much the expenditure upon Aldershot was to be. The hon. Member raised no question whether it was desirable to go to Aldershot or not. He only wanted to know who was answerable for the outlay. But up jumped the noble Lord and said that he was answerable, and afterwards that some one else was answerable. He apprehended, however, that the noble Lord was not the architect. The total estimated expense of the barracks at Aldershot was £360,000, of which £250,000 had al- ready been expended, but the noble Lord at the head of the Government had not ventured to tell the Committee that this £360,000 would be the outside of the expense. He did not believe that a single Member of the Committee—not even the Administrative Reformer opposite, the hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Tite), had the most distant idea whether the barracks were to cost £400,000 or £500,000 or any other number of hundreds of thousands. No doubt to a certain extent the Government could not help going on with Aldershot, but the discussion which had taken place that night had very much shaken his opinion as to the utility of it. Among all the complaints with which the newspapers had teemed during the late war, he had never seen any as to the inability of our troops to act together in bodies when called upon to fight. The Doctors were bad, the Engineers were bad, the Commissaries were bad, but there was no complaint of that sort. The right hon. Member for south Wiltshire (Mr. S. Herbert) said that our troops were very artificially brought up, and he seemed to think that by getting the soldiers into huts they would be taught how to manage for themselves. That might be, but the Committee were not asked to do that, for Aldershot was to be a great barrack establishment. The only means by which the Committee could express its opinion of the want of definiteness on the part of the Government was to vote them a little less money, and unless some explanation were given as to the extent to which the expenditure was to go he should be inclined to support the Amendment. It would be desirable, too, that the Government should give some information as to the intended outlay on the proposed depôt for army clothing, for the site of which £20,000—rather a formidable sum—was asked for in the Votes.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

I thought, Sir, I had explained that permanent barracks are to be built at Aldershot for 4,000 infantry, 1,500 cavalry, and a few batteries of artillery, and that it is not intended to build barracks for a larger number of men than that. Troops are to be collected together there in a larger number during the spring and summer months for the purposes of exercise, but it is not intended to make it a winter camp.

MR. HENLEY

The noble Lord has not said a word as to what further expense will be incurred.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

It is intended to build permanent barracks for the number of men which I have just stated, and that limit will not be exceeded, but I really am not able to say what the whole expense of building those barracks will be.

SIR HARRY VERNEY

said, he wished to point out, that it was by means of the camp at Aldershot that London, Woolwich Arsenal, and the south coast were to be defended.

COLONEL KNOX

said, he could not avoid expressing his disappointment that the Government had given no information to the Committee as to where the extremely extravagant expenditure on Aldershot was to stop. He hoped the Undersecretary at War would inform the Committee whether it was intended, after the permanent barracks were erected, to keep up the huts, for that could only be done at a very heavy expense. He also wished to know whether anything would be done with Portman Street Barracks, which were a disgrace to the country, being nothing better than a tumble-down stable. The first object of the Government should be to provide proper barrack accommodation for the troops quartered in the metropolis, with a view to prevent them from being driven to the public-house. The barracks at Aldershot were complete in all their arrangements, but when fresh barracks were built at other stations all the new improvements ought to be introduced. The large item for Aldershot exclusively, to the neglect of other barrack stations, was highly objectionable, and the Government ought to give an assurance that some limit would be put to such a large expenditure.

SIR DE LACY EVANS

said, he fully concurred in thinking that before new barracks were constructed at vast expense at Aldershot that it would be as well to look to the state of the barracks in London. Before that enormous expenditure was incurred, Portman Street Barracks ought, at least, to be put in a proper condition. He had been surprised to hear from the hon. Member for Buckingham (Sir H. Verney) that the barracks at Aldershot were of the greatest possible importance—that they were designed for the defence of the metropolis, and indeed of our southern coast. The hon. Gentleman was evidently misled by the brilliant oratory of the noble Viscount (Lord Palmerston), who had dilated on the transport of troops from Aldershot to Portsmouth and Plymouth, until any one would have fancied our shores on the eve of being invaded. That, however, was altogether a delusion. If we were really in danger of invasion, undoubtedly some central spot, perhaps at Aldershot, or some large tract of land near Sandhurst, would be convenient for the assembling of a large body of troops, and if a corps d'armée were placed there capable of being transferred rapidly from one point to another, a valuable strategical object might be gained. But when that was made the excuse for demanding £400,000 to build barracks for some 4,000 or 5,000 men, he considered that it was trifling with their judgment. What could such a small corps do? The accommodation which was not sufficient for the concentration of a larger body than that could only enable our troops to play at soldiers. The hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. W. Williams) had recommended that the whole of these Estimates should be submitted to a Committee, a course which, might be advantageously adopted without necessarily tying the hands of the Executive in the meantime. The noble Lord at the head of the Government spoke of the purchase of ground for practising our troops in large divisions, but that was only a diminutive item in the charge. It was very doubtful whether the large outlay that had been made for huts erected of fragile material was a prudent expenditure. For that purpose alone, up to the middle of last year, no lees a sum than £400,000 had been spent. Other items raised the outlay to nearly £800,000, and the aggregate charge would probably approach to £1,000,000 sterling. That large expenditure had escaped the proper scrutiny of Parliament, because everybody's attention at that time had been engrossed by the war in the Crimea; but now that peace was restored some curb ought to be put upon it. He had supported the Government the other night in their proposition for putting our great maritime depôts in the best possible state ofdefence—not that he seriously contemplated any danger of invasion, that was entirely out of the question—but because those establishments ought to be secure against all accidents. If the country were really in any danger, it could not be protected by a small force of 5,000 men from Aldershot. No sane foreign Government would venture to assail this country with less than 200,000 men, or without a conviction that but a small proportion of their army would ever return to its native shores. The noble Viscount was all-powerful in that House, and would doubtless be able to reject the Amendment; but, if there was any considerable manifestation of feeling that night against such reckless expenditure, the Government might be induced to practise greater circumspection and economy. The retention of our troops in huts during the winter months could only increase the difficulty of recruiting the army, without serving any useful purpose. He was glad, therefore, that it was to be discontinued.

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

said, he felt inclined to vote with the hon. and gallant Member for Bodmin unless the Government gave the Committee more definite information as to the ultimate cost of the barracks at Aldershot. It was clear they could not rely on the Estimates of the expense of these buildings which had been laid before them. There was an entry, for example, of £150,000 for the Hospital at Netley; but in the marginal note it was stated that the cost of the hospital would be £260,000. He hoped, therefore, that some definite assurance would be given as to the estimated cost of the barracks at Aldershot. There were other items in the Vote that also required explanation. He found an entry of £3,000 for drainage at Aldershot; another of £1,000 for levelling and gravelling the parade; and a third of £2,000 for making roads. Could not this expense of £6,000 be avoided by employing the soldiers in cutting drains, gravelling the parade, and making roads? There was also an entry of £40,000 for providing quarters at Dovor for forty-four officers. [Sir J. RAMSDEN: Look at the marginal note.] He was asked to look at the margin, and there he found that the building was to be in the mediaeval style; but surely, whether in the mediæval style or not, nearly £1,000 for every officer was a large sum to pay for their accommodation.

SIR JOHN RAMSDEN

said, he wished to say distinctly, in answer to the question put by the right hon. Baronet, that the sum of £400,000 stated in the Estimate was the entire sum that would be required for the completion of the works at Aldershot. The first estimate for the barracks at Aldershot was £250,000 voted in 1855. Next year it was thought desirable to have a careful inquiry into the whole system of the construction of the barracks, and the result of that inquiry was a recommenda- tion of sundry improvements, such as the erection of separate quarters for married men, a better description of quarters for all the soldiers, and the erection of covered places for the men on parade, at drill, and for general use in rainy weather. To meet the additional expense incurred by acting upon these recommendations the original Estimate of £250,000 was raised to £360,000. The Committee would observe that the total estimate of the work stood at £360,000, while the sum already spent, and that which was proposed to be spent, amounted to £400,000. That difference arose from the difficulty of getting a firm foundation for the barracks, by which an unexpected item of £40,000 was added to the expense. Undoubtedly the sum required was a large one; but the Committee should bear in mind that the object for which it was required was also a large one. Accommodation was provided for 4,000 infantry, 1,600 horses, the great number of men whom that number of horses implied, and a large body of artillery. The hon. and gallant Members who had taken part in the discussion were no doubt much better acquainted with these matters than he was, but with great submission he would observe that, according to his information, the amount stated was below the average expense for such a description of barracks. Barracks erected on the improved system cost for every 1,000 men £94,000, so that, taking the number of men at Aldershot, the expense of that barrack would be considerably below the average. They had it on the high authority of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Wiltshire (Mr. S. Herbert) that it was necessary to provide better barrack accommodation in England, and the hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Tite) bore testimony to the open and fair manner in which the contracts for those works had been made by the Government. The right hon. Baronet opposite (Sir J. Pakington) thought it was desirable that soldiers should be employed in making roads and other works. The Government had endeavoured to carry out that arrangement as far as practicable, and from a Return which he had obtained it appeared that the number of men daily employed on such works was 720. An explanation had been asked of a sum taken for a clothing depôts, and which was required for the purchase of a site. At present the central clothing depot was at Weedon, but great inconvenience was experienced by that arrange- ment. Weedon being in the centre of England, the cloth, when purchased, had to be conveyed there by land transport, at great expense, and the clothing, when made, was brought to London for distribution among the troops. It was, therefore, proposed that a depôt should be constructed at Rotherhithe, where it would be much more conveniently situated.

LORD CLAUD HAMILTON

said, they had now for the first time got an explanation of the discrepancy that existed in the Estimates between the sum of £360,000 and £400,000. The hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for War had accounted for the £40,000 about which so many inquiries had been made, and lie was glad that the explanation had been given; but, if they were expected to vote away £40,000, without explanation, what sum might they not be expected to vote next year in the same way? He hoped that a more definite explanation still would he made with regard to the Vote under consideration, and unless it was given he should feel it his duty to vote for the Amendment.

MR. JOSEPH LOCKE

said, he was extremely glad to find that a discussion had taken place on the question, as he had frequently had reason to complain of the loose way in which the Estimates were framed. Whatever might be the opinion of hon. and gallant Members with respect to works at Aldershot, they ought to thank the hon. Members for Surrey, Oxfordshire, and Droitwich, for pressing this subject of the Estimates so strongly upon the Government. As to Aldershot he had not one word to say as a civilian upon a Vote which the noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) said involved the defence of the country. But the attention of the Committee had been called to a discrepancy in the Estimates amounting to £40,000. He was perfectly willing to accept the explanation of the hon. Baronet (Sir J. Ramsden) that it arose from unexpected difficulties in constructing works at Aldershot. The discussion had elicited the important fact that for the Netley Hospital, which was originally estimated to cost £150,000, an extra sum of £110,000 was intended to be asked. The noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) had come forward very gallantly to the defence of the Vote for Aldershot, for which he said he was entirely responsible; but would he accept the responsibility of this extra sum for Netley Hospital? Netley Abbey looked on the mud banks of the Southampton Water, and he (Mr. Locke) should not have thought that that was a very eligible spot for a hospital. £70,000 had been already expended on that hospital, but it was rumoured that the Government intended to abandon it; and he wished to know whether that was the fact. The extra Vote of £110,000; upon an original Estimate of £150,000; showed how loosely and blunderingly those Estimates were laid before the House, and the noble Lord at the head of the Government ought to be held responsible for them. Only think of £260,000 being expended upon a hospital which was to accommodate no more than 1,000 men! They were constantly reminded in that House what they owed to the British soldier, but surely the House owed something to the country which had to pay such extravagant amounts. He had not intended to vote against the Government, but until a satisfactory answer was given as to the blunder with regard to the Estimate for Netley Hospital he should vote for the Amendment.

MR. STAFFORD

said, he thought he could give the hon. Member for Honiton (Mr. Joseph Locke) some information with regard to Netley Hospital. It was begun in utter defiance and ignorance of all those principles of sanitary knowledge which we had learnt by bitter experience during the last few years. Its site was chosen without any reference to medical authorities. When the building was commenced the attention of those who ought to have been consulted and who had the interest of the British soldier at heart, was drawn to it, and it was found necessary to make so many important and costly alterations that the Government consented to expend £110,000 more upon it. Even that increase, he believed, would not be sufficient to build it in the manner in which it ought to be built. The barracks for which so large a sum was asked were to be built in a manner against which that House had protested year after year, and which every Government had admitted to be defective. When we heard of the failure of our prestige and of the apparent annihilation of our army owing to mal-administration, we were told that all would turn out for the better, that Aldershot would console us for all our disasters, that the experience which we had learned at so dear a price would be there distilled in the studies and discipline of our army, and that, in fact, Aldershot would become our great stronghold of defence. Well, we had got it, and it was remarkable that after all our experience of it—[Cheers, and cries of "Divide !"]—he understood those ironical cheers, but they need not hope to succeed in silencing him by those means. It was remarkable that, except from some occupants of the Ministerial Benches, no one had risen to defend Aldershot except that remarkable Administrative Reformer the hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Tite), who had spoken rather in its favour, but what he said was not his own opinion; it was that of two Committees which had the advantage of his being a Member of them. They had had the opinion of military men of all parties, who had criticised in no measured terms the system of carrying on military affairs at Aldershot; and they had all asked, and had as yet got no answer to the question, "What is doing at Aldershot?" Were you by the education of your troops taking measures to prevent the recurrence of those disasters of the Crimea? Were you teaching your soldiers to meet the contingencies of war? were you teaching them to trench, to cook, to dig, to make roads which was as indispensable to an army in a campaign as real fighting, or were you hiring labour to do that for them which they ought to be taught to do for themselves? If you only collected troops at Aldershot for the purpose of making them march to Farnham and back for the amusement of the people at the windows, and amidst the waving of the handkerchiefs of the ladies, he said that you were wasting the money of the country, and were more blameable than any previous Government, because you continued in a course of error in spite of large and recent experience. He had abstained from addressing the Committee at an earlier period of the evening because he had expected that some member of the Government would have risen to state what was really doing at Aldershot. He found the expense for the Staff had been increased by £100,000, and he wished to know what was the return for the money; for, if the troops were no better qualified to act together as an army, the outlay was pure waste. Our army at present was becoming something between a job and a toy, and, although it would never be unpopular with the people of England, still it might hereafter, if the present course were continued, be made a rallying cry for those who wished to lower our institutions. [Cries of "Divide!"] The Committee would divide, but, perhaps, not so quickly as some hon. Gentlemen desired. He had observed, during his Parliamentary experience, that when a subject was debated so thoroughly and so earnestly as the present subject had been, it proved that the matter was one of deep interest to the public, and he was sure the noble Lord at the head of the Government was not a man to overlook the importance of the present discussion nor the great interest which the general public had in it. He besought the noble Lord to consider well the matter, to inquire into its origin, and the parties who proposed it—why ill-ventilated huts were erected in the worst site that could be found in the neighbourhood. He should vote for the Motion to reduce the Vote, not because he objected to the erection of barracks, but because he believed the expenditure would produce no advantage to the country, and was opposed to the opinions of almost every military man in that House.

MR. WILLIAM WILLIAMS

said, he must remind the Committee that large sums had already been granted for the erection of barracks at Aldershot, and before the enormous increase now asked for was allowed, it would be well to have some explanation of the expenditure of the former amount.

SIR WILLIAM CODRINGTON

said, he would put it to the Committee whether it would be wise economy, having already built a considerable portion of the barracks for three regiments of infantry, three of cavalry, and two troops of artillery, they should now abandon those buildings and sacrifice the former outlay to avoid the expense of completing the barracks? There was one point in relation to Aldershot which he hoped would not be lost sight of. Although it might not be necessary or advisable to assemble troops there in winter when they could not manœuvre, yet it was highly important to assemble troops to accustom them to move together. He remembered at Varna seeing, to his own great instruction, the hon. and gallant Member for Westminster (Sir De L. Evans) move his division, and there could be no reason why the same operation should not be performed at home. There was no reason why brigades or divisions should not be made complete with ammunition, land transport, ambulances, &c., in the same manner as if really on the scene of war, and even if that system of practising the moving of troops should cost some money, the expenditure would undoubt- edly be compensated by the experience that would be gained.

SIR WILLIAM WILLIAMS

said, he wished to assure the Committee that he was quite in favour of Aldershot. He wished to see the higher branches of instruction carried on in that camp, so that not only might the men be taught to move with precision, but that they should understand siege duty. If such a system of teaching were pursued, he felt assured that the country would never regret the necessary expenditure. Should Aldershot fall through, our whole system of camp instruction would fall with it, and England would be reduced to the same condition as before the war. He had seen almost every institution conducive to the efficiency of the army destroyed, and he well recollected that when on a former occasion the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Buckinghamshire (Mr. Disraeli), taunting the noble Lord at the head of the Government, inquired where were their plans, that reproach went to his heart, for he knew that in consequence of the destruction of the military survey department they never had any. No general, either in the Russian, Prussian, or French service, ever transmitted a Report to his Sovereign without a plan attached, while English general officers alone were without the means of doing so. Most certainly he should give his Vote for the original proposition.

COLONEL SOMERSET

said, he was also in favour of Aldershot, and if the Government stated on their responsibility that £400,000 was necessary for the erection of barracks there, he should record his vote with them.

MR. LOCKE KING

said, he wished to inquire whether it was true that the Government had purchased, or had agreed to purchase, a piece of land in the neighbourhood of Aldershot for the erection of an hospital, the camp being considered exceedingly unhealthy.

SIR JOHN RAMSDEN

replied, that so far from Aldershot being unhealthy, the number of sick was 1 per cent. less than in other quarters in the kingdom.

MR. LOCKE KING

said, he must remind the hon. Under-Secretary that he had not answered his question with respect to the purchase of land for an hospital. He would also like to know if such a purchase had been made, why the item was not included in the Estimates.

SIR JOHN RAMSDEN

said, the Government were at present in treaty for the purchase of a small piece of land for an hospital, with a view to provide the necessary accommodation for an average number of patients. The reason why the item had not been included in the Estimates was, that the purchase not being yet completed the Government did not think themselves entitled to ask for a Vote.

MR. HENLEY

said, he saw that, in addition to the sums which the Committee had been discussing, a further sum of £5,000 for Aldershot appeared in a different part of the Estimates. He wished to have an explanation of that item.

SIR JOHN RAMSDEN

said, that the sum in question was made up of a great number of small items which it would have been inconvenient to give in detail.

COLONEL BOLDERO

said, he objected to two different things, embracing military and civil expenditure, being mixed up in one Vote as in the present instance. He considered that he could put the Government in the way to save £150,000, merely by suggesting that instead of building an hospital for 1,000 patients, which would never be filled, to erect one capable of accommodating 500. He would instance two hospitals, one at Yarmouth and another at Deal, which had since been converted into barracks, as a proof that the Government were rather apt to build hospitals too extensive in their character. He wished also to know what the sum of £46,000 for drainage at Woolwich Arsenal meant. He thought it would always be wise to charge the drainage in the Estimate for construction.

SIR JOHN RAMSDEN

said, that the Government had taken the best medical opinion with respect to Netley Hospital, and it was entirely in favour of the present arrangement. The sum of £46,000 for drainage at Woolwich represented the cost of laying iron pipes under the roads throughout the arsenal.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 99; Noes 158: Majority 59.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

MR. STAFFORD

said, he hoped the Under-Secretary for War would not proceed further with the Estimates to-night.

SIR JOHN RAMSDEN

said, he would assent to the Chairman's reporting progress.

The House resumed.

Resolution to be reported on Monday next.

Committee to sit again on Monday next.