MUTINY BILL—COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 16 March 1857)

§ MR. ROBERT PALMER
wished to ask the Under Secretary for the War Department whether the Government had taken into consideration a memorial that had been presented some six months ago relative to the charges made upon counties for the maintenance of persons committed to prison for military offences? The visiting magistrates at Reading had just made a requisition to him for his interference, complaining that since the establishment of the camp at Aldershot the commitments had become very frequent, whereas formerly they were very rare, and that the amount paid by the Government on account of such offenders was not one-half of the expense to which the county was put. He thought that a clause might be inserted in the Mutiny Bill that would remove this cause of complaint.

§ MR. FREDERICK PEEL
said, the present Bill did not contain a clause to 2370 that effect; but he would take care the subject should not be lost sight of.

§ COLONEL BOLDERO
would like to know what extra pay the troops would receive that were about to be despatched to China? The climate of China was at least as trying as that of India, and there the men received double pay. He next wished to point out that as they were on the eve of sending out so large a force it would be advisable to consult all the army medical officers now in England or Ireland who had served in the late war with China, as well as those who had served with regiments in China, in order to ascertain what would be the best means to secure the health of the troops while serving out there.

§ MR. FREDERICK PEEL
said, that every precaution would be taken to preserve the troops against the effects of the climate of China.

COLONEL NORTH
But the hon. Gentleman has forgotten to say whether the troops are to receive any extra pay, or field allowances.

§ MR. FREDERICK PEEL
The regiments going out will be paid after the same rate as the regiments now stationed at Hong Kong.

§ SIR JAMES ANDERSON
complained that although the Bill now before them purported to relieve the people of Scotland from the hardship attendant on the billeting system, it in reality only shifted the burden from one class of the community to another. For while private housekeepers would be freed from the necessity of providing billets, publicans and spirit-dealers would have to bear the burden in an enhanced degree.

MAJOR KNOX
would take that opportunity of appealing to the Government on behalf of the wives and families of the soldiers that were being sent out to China. If there was to be no increase of pay or no field allowances, how were they to maintain their families in the meanwhile?

§ SIR WILLIAM CODRINGTON
said, with reference to the billeting question in Scotland, he could not see how troops were to be moved without being quartered somewhere on the march. If any relief were afforded it must be general, and he could see no reason why an exception should be made in favour of one part of the kingdom over another. The present discussion was premature until the subject was taken up as a general question.

§ MR. W. EWART
wished very much the subject was taken up as a general question; for the whole system of billeting appeared to him to be most unjust. Either barrack accommodation should be provided, or lodgings should be hired for soldiers on the march just the same as for any other travellers.

COLONEL NORTH
said, he could not see why Scotland should be more favoured in this matter than England or Ireland. He did not know why private persons in Scotland should be exempted from this duty, when in Ireland they were compelled to discharge it. He remarked that there was always a great row made by hon. Members opposite when any measure was taken for the comfort or convenience of the soldier. He did not understand why there should be this outcry because there was this practice in Scotland, which he admitted to be somewhat disagreeable.

§ SIR JAMES ANDERSON
said, that the hon. and gallant Member misunderstood him. He (Sir J. Anderson) was arguing in support of the comfort and convenience of the soldier himself, who was, under the present system, driven about from house to house, wherever he could get an entrance. He was an advocate for one uniform law. If the present miserable allowance made to the housekeepers for the accommodation of the soldiers—he believed 1½d. a night—were increased, there would probably be no difficulty about the matter.

§ COLONEL BOLDERO
said, a system prevailed in England, in corporate towns particularly, which he thought might be advantageously established in Scotland. When troops were quartered upon one of those towns the inhabitants engaged a large building or storehouse, where they located those soldiers, without any inconvenience to the town itself. He would recommend the municipal authorities in Scotland to adopt a similar plan.

§ MR. W. EWART
said, that the hon. and gallant Member opposite did not seem to be aware that Scotland had been labouring under a peculiarity of oppression that was unknown in England or Ireland. By the new clause in the Mutiny Act that evil was remedied, and the law was made the same in Scotland as it was in England and Ireland.

§ SIR WILLIAM CODRINGTON
said, the difficulty was not so much in the system of billeting; but it arose from the natural reluctance of persons to afford the 2372 soldier the necessary accommodation for only one or two nights altogether.