HC Deb 13 February 1860 vol 156 cc962-4
MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, that before the right hon. Gentleman left the Chair he wished to called attention to the enormous increase in the Navy Estimates for the present year. These Estimates, the grand total of which exceeded £12,800,000, were larger in amount by more than a£1,000,000 than any that had ever been presented to that House in time of peace. Such an augmentation in our armaments was naturally supposed by the country to indicate that the Government were under an apprehension that war would occur at no distant period. It was desirable that the House should know from the Government whether there was any foundation for that impression. If there was not, the Government were not justified in submitting such extravagant Estimates to Parliament. The number of men required for the navy this year of peace was 85,500, being 6,000 more than they required when they were actually at war with Russia. The cost of the navy was £13,900,000, being £8,050,000 more than was required in 1851. The army and navy this year cost £14,626,000 more than was required in 1851. The expenditure under these heads was increasing at a fearful ratio, and must continue to do so unless the House took the matter seriously into its own hands. The greater the expenditure the greater the patronage at the command of the Ministry of the day. He took notice, with regard to shipbuilding, that the shipwrights' wages per ton were 50 per cent higher at Woolwich than at Chatham, and he thought the difference most extraordinary. He also wished to inquire whether it was the intention of the Government to go on creating a vast accumulation of Admirals. There were no fewer than 336 Admirals in the present Estimates, and that was an Admiral for almost every ship and gun-boat in the navy. With regard to Generals of Marines, there were no less than 38 in the present Estimates, though he believed that during the last war no such officer was known. He believed the appointment to be a sinecure. A vast amount of money was spent as bounties and gratuities, and he therefore hoped that the noble Secretary to the Admiralty would be able to give a better account than he had given last year of the success of the new scheme in procuring able seamen; and he likewise trusted that the noble Lord at the head of the Government would state whether it was on account of the apprehension of war with any great Power that he required so much money for naval and military purposes.

COLONEL SYKES

said, he concurred with the hon. Member for Lambeth in his observations upon the alarming increase of the Naval and Military Estimates. If they went on increasing us they had done of late years, vast as was the increase of the capital of the country, it would be unqual to meet the enormous growth of expenditure. He could see nothing either in the external relations of the country or in its internal to account for the increase in the naval and military expenditure, which was progressing absolutely systematically and determinedly. The increase of £1,000,000 in the Naval Estimates of the year would have enabled the Chancellor of the Exchequer to remove the war duties on tea and sugar. It would be better for the country to be actually at war, because then they might hope to see some end of the expense, but there seemed to be no prospect of a cessation of the expenditure, which was occasioned by the state of suspicion in which they now were. When the noble Lord the Secretary for the Admiralty was on the Opposition Benches, he gave the House reason to suppose that he was in favour of economy. Since the noble Lord had come into office he had somewhat disappointed those expectations. In the name of common sense why could not a proposition be made for a mutual disarmament in France and this country.

MR. LINDSAY

said, that though he deeply regretted the great increase in the Estimates, and did not think there was that necessity for it which others imagined, he acquitted the noble Secretary to the Admiralty from all responsibility on account of the increase. The noble Lord, simply as an executive officer, carried out the wishes of the House, and the only question was, whether they were getting the best value for the money spent.

MR. BENTINCK

said, he had only two remarks to make in reference to what had fallen from the gallant Member for Aberdeen (Colonel Sykes) on the subject of mutual disarmament. He merely wished to say, what he believed was the opinion of every rational man, that the term was in itself an absurdity. There could be no mutual disarmament between this country and France. What was disarmament in England was not disarmament in France. He trusted that they would not again hear such a proposition brought forward. All he wished to say in reference to his noble Friend the Secretary of the Admiralty was, that he quite concurred in the opinion expressed by the hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Lindsay) that the increase in the Navy Estimates this year was not owing to any fault of the noble Lord, who was unable to carry out in office the economical views he had expressed when in Opposition. His noble and gallant Friend when in Opposition did his best to arrest the attention of the House and the Board of Admiralty to certain abuses which were alleged to exist. The noble Lord at that time fully established his case. He (Mr. Bentinck) could state from his own knowledge, that since the noble Lord had taken office, no man could have worked harder or have done more to carry out in practice the pledges he had given when in Opposition. It was mere justice to the noble Lord to say so much. So far from the results of the expenditure of the Admiralty for the present year being over and above what they ought to be, our armaments, great as they were, must, so far as the present defences of the country were concerned, be considered as hardly adequate for the maintenance of our position in case of hostilities such as might occur at any time on a very short notice, and as might involve an enormous stake if this country was not defended by a large maritime force.

CAPTAIN JERVIS

said, he attributed the large demands which were now made upon the country for purposes of defence to the House of Commons having been so long "led by the nose" by the late Mr. Hume. In addition to the £70,000,000 of which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had spoken on Friday night, no less a sum than £10,000,000 would be required for national defences. If the House of Commons had done its duty from 1825 downwards we should not now be called upon to pay for what ought to have been done long ago.

Motion agreed to.