SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES.

HC Deb 14 March 1861 vol 161 cc1996-2034

House in Committee; Mr. MASSEY in the Chair.

(In the Committee.)

(1.) 146,044 Laud Forces, exclusive of men employed in India.

MR. T. G. BARING,

in rising to bring forward the Army Estimates, said he would ask permission to reserve any observations he had to make with respect to that part of the speech of the right hon. and gallant Member for Huntingdon which referred to the expenditure for army services in 1859–60 till the accounts for that year were finally made up, and it was known whether there was a necessity to come to the House for a Supplementary Estimate. Of this he would assure the Committee, that no part of the Vote of Credit for China expenditure should be applied in supplement of the ordinary army expenditure for that year. So far as he was personally concerned he did not feel in the slightest degree annoyed at the course which had been taken by the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, who had invariably treated him with the greatest frankness and courtesy, although he ventured to think that it would have been more convenient if the observations with respect to the Estimates had been deferred till after the statement he had now to submit to the Committee. He would allude to those observations in their proper place, and he should speak with great diffidence in doing so if he had himself prepared the Estimates. But that was not the case, for they had been most accurately and carefully framed by the noble Lord the Secretary of State for War.

The number of men he had to propose of all ranks was 146,044, which was a nominal increase of 775 men on the numbers voted for 1860–61. But it was to be re- membered that in the number of men voted last year, the embodied militia were not included. The right hon. and gallant Member for Huntingdon had mentioned this as if it had not been the usual practice, whereas the embodied militia were always omitted from the numbers, and had been omitted in the Estimates of the right hon. Gentleman himself. He thought that he could prove that the right hon. Gentleman was not correct when he stated that the nominal increase of 775 men was equivalent to a real decrease of 9,000. In order to give as clear a statement as he could of the numbers proposed to he voted, and for which provision was taken in the Estimates of 1861–62, as compared with the year now closing, he would compare the average of the numbers actually borne, as appeared from the Adjutant General's returns for the year now closing, including the embodied militia, with the numbers for which provision was made in the coming year. By taking that comparison the Committee would clearly see how we stood during the past year, and how we should stand during the year now about to begin. Commencing with the whole British army—in 1860–61 the average number of regular troops borne acording to the Adjutant General's returns, including Staff, was 228,020. The average number of militia embodied during the year was 9,569, making a total of 237,589. Against these numbers the total number to be borne during 1861–62 is estimated at 212,773, showing a decrease of 24,816. In order to explain this decrease and advance a step further he would take the number of men borne during the year 1860–61, paid out of the Indian revenue. In that year there were paid from the revenues of India, in the East Indies, 72,712; depots at home, 15,058; being a total of 87,770. In 1861–62 there would be in the East Indies, 62,041; depots, 6,638; total 68,779, showing a decrease in the numbers paid out of the revenues of India of 19,041. He had added 2,000 to the number of troops in the East Indies, given at page six of the Estimates, because all the regiments expected to return from India in the course of the year were borne for numbers upon the British establishment, but only a part could of course be reckoned in the estimates of cost. Pursuing the calculation still further he would state the numbers borne and paid for out of the imperial revenues in each year. For 1860–61 the average number of men was 149,819; provi- sion was taken in the present Estimates for 144,044. The real decrease upon the British establishment, therefore, was5,767, instead of 9,000 as stated by the right hon. and gallant Gentleman. He would now go on to compare the numbers in the colonies and in the United Kingdom. In 1860–61 there were in the colonies and China 55,883; in 1861–62, 51,717, showing a decrease of 4,166, and there remained a total of 93,936 employed in the United Kingdom, including the embodied militia, for 1860–61, whereas the total for 1861–62, with no militia, would be 92,327—showing a decrease of 1609. The numbers in the United Kingdom would be, as he had said, 92,327, to which adding the Indian depots—more than 6,000—would give 99,000 as the average for the United Kingdom for 1861–62, and as the regiments from India arrived we should be still stronger at the end of the year. In order to make the matter more clear, he would give the Committee the number of battalions for the two years. On the 1st of April, 1860, there were 40 in England, 57 in India, 33 in the colonies, and 9 in China. In 1861, the numbers would be respectively 49, 51, 34, and 5, being an increase of 9 battalions at home, and there would be a further increase when the New Zealand affair was settled. In comparing the force of the two years in the United Kingdom no doubt the diminution in 1861–62 would be larger than he had yet stated; because the Indian depots were larger last year than they would be this. But he thought that the substitution of regular troops for militia, and having more battalions of regular infantry in this country would quite make up for a small decrease in numbers. He did not say that with a view to disparage the militia, because no one could ignore the admirable state of discipline to which those regiments had been brought by the energy and attention of their commanding officers, and by the good conduct of the men. On the other hand, no hon. and gallant Gentleman who had commanded a militia regiment would deny that regiments of militia never could be perfectly equal to regiments of the Line. The Committee would see that, in addition to the strength of battalions of the Line in this country, they would have a larger reserve of militia regiments than they had at commencement of the year, and that the perfectly trained men who would remain available would form the nucleus for raising the force to the same strength again, if necessary. The number of militia disembodied in the course of the year would be 5,500 artillery and 12,800 infantry. So much for the numbers for the year 1861–62, which appeared to Her Majesty's Government to be sufficient, and yet not too great for the position which this country occupied in the world. The right hon. and gallant Member anticipated that there would be an excess on the numbers voted, and he founded his statement upon the actual numbers on the 1st of February last. He could assure the Committee that the subject had received the careful consideration of Lord Herbert and of the Commander-in-Chief, and that no difficulty was anticipated in so regulating the numbers as to bring them within those for whom provision was made. Hon. Members were aware of the state of a regiment which came home from India, and as part of the force was coming back from India he did not anticipate any difficulty in keeping the number within the Estimate which he hoped would be voted by the Committee.

Having explained as clearly as he could their position as to numbers in the coming year, he thought he ought to explain briefly how the reductions would be made. There would be a reduction in India of five battalions of infantry and of one regiment of cavalry coming home. There would be a reduction in the strength of infantry and cavalry regiments in India, and there would be a reduction in the strength of the depôts of Indian regiments at home. The cavalry regiments would be reduced by one troop. No officer would be placed on half-pay, as the supernumeraries would be absorbed as vacancies occurred. That would explain the reduction of 19,000 men in the force paid by the revenues of India. No men would be discharged in India, as it was anticipated the regiments would reduce themselves quite as quickly as was desirable. With respect to the colonies, the force would be reduced by the recall of five battalions from China, and increased to a small extent by troops sent to New Zealand. There would be a slight alteration, which it might be convenient to notice. The Malta Fencibles, whose pay was extremely low, would be changed into artillery, with an increase of pay. The change was very popular in the corps, and would make the force much more effective. At home the alterations would be as follows:—A regiment of cavalry would come home from India. The cavalry regiments would be reduced by twenty-five men and twenty-eight horses in each regiment. Provision would be made for six-eighths of a new garrison brigade of Royal Artillery, the two batteries coming from China forming part of the brigade. It was possible that four batteries of Horse Artillery would come from India in the course of the year, and if that should be the cage, the formation of the brigade of garrison artillery would be postponed, and by a different arrangement the money would be sufficient to provide for the four batteries of Horse Artillery which returned. There would be a small increase in the Royal Engineers during the year, two companies being added in order to form a depot at Chatham. The military train would be reduced by one battalion. With regard to the infantry, the reduction in the number of men upon the establishment of regiments employed in China must be set against the battalions coining back from India and China. Those regiments were increased on the breaking out of the Chinese war, and, the war being concluded, they would be brought back to their original strength. There would be an increase in the establishment of two battalions employed in New Zealand. There would be a decrease of one second assistant-surgeon in all the regiments at home. It was found that two assistant-surgeons had not enough to do, and therefore had not sufficient opportunities of improving in their profession. There would, however, be an increase in the number of Staff surgeons in order to provide for detachment duty and ball practice.

With regard to that part of the whole expense of the army, which depended upon the numbers of men voted, he would follow the right hon. Gentleman's example, and take together Votes 2, 3, 4, 9, and 10. Votes 2 and 3 were for pay, allowances and miscellaneous. Vote 4 was for the embodied Militia. Vote 9 was for clothing, and Vote 10 was for provisions. In 1860–61 the total of those Votes was £7,479,363. In 1861–62itwas£7,410,346, showing a decrease of £69,017. That comparison would not entirely accord with the sums voted for 1860–61, and for this reason—that from the estimate for clothing for 1860–61 was deducted, as would be seen at page 84 of the Estimates, a sum to be received from the Indian Government amounting to £200,000. That sum was not a payment for supplies furnished to In- dia in 1860–61; it was simply a repayment for former supplies. A Committee of the House which sat last Session recommended that the system should be altered, and payment made at once. It was the last time such an item would appear; but in a comparison of this year and last that sum of £200,000 must be added to the clothing Vote for 1860–61. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Huntingdon said, that he did not think sufficient money had been taken to provide for the numbers to be voted. But the rough calculation of the right hon. Gentleman himself proved, if it proved anything, that the money was sufficient, and moreover the return of expenditure upon the Votes which he was reviewing for the last year in which the accounts were made up, gave an average of £54 per man, which was about the sum proposed to be voted for the ensuing year. He did not think, therefore, that the anticipations of the right hon. Gentleman would be realized. This year a very advantageous change has been made in the preparation of the Estimates of the War Department. They were now prepared by that branch of the department which controlled the expenditure during the whole of the year, and much greater accuracy, therefore, might be expected in the preparation of them.

He would now advert to those changes in regard to expenditure, and in the administration of the personnel of the army, which were of sufficient importance to be noticed in a general statement. A Report of a Commission on the recruiting of the army had recently been laid on the table, and in accordance with its recommendations it was proposed to make a change with regard to enlistment. The Commission pointed out what had been pointed out before, that it was equally advantageous to a man in India, who had served his ten years, to take his discharge and come home at the expense of the public, and* then re-enlist, as to re-engage on the spot, and remain with his regiment. It was proposed, therefore, to give to a man who re-engaged at the expiration of his time, very great advantages as compared with those who took their discharge and subsequently enlisted. It was also proposed to give to those men a furlough on their return to this country, or on the first convenient opportunity. It was also proposed to reduce the bounty to £1, making it up to the soldier, however, by allowing him a larger quantity of necessaries. How far the War Department would be able to go in this respect, however, had not yet been decided. In regard to the food of the army he had not much to say which would be new to the House. The system of slaughtering cattle and baking bread by the commissariat—which worked admirably—had been extended, as well as the system of providing the soldier with a certain quantity of groceries for a 1½d stoppage which had answered so well that it had been put in practice at the camps, in the Mediterranean, and the West Indies. This tended to, an alteration in the pay and stoppages of the soldier, and to the introduction of an uniform 6d. stoppage, thereby giving the soldier the same net pay in all parts of the world. With respect to clothing it was proposed, instead of a tunic lined with serge, to furnish the soldier with a waistcoat, and a tunic unlined, which would be available for hot and cold climates. Measures had been taken to simplify the patterns of clothing, and to diminish the number of different sorts of cloth, and it was expected that when the cloth was not of so. many different qualities the supply would be improved. The clothing manufactory at Pimlico was well worth a visit. The rapidity with which large quantities of' clothing were turned out was remarkable. A short time ago the clothing for seven battalions was sunk in the river and destroyed, but the manufactory made up the. deficiency in a fortnight, and would have turned it out much more quickly but for-some difficulty with respect to the facings.

The health of the army had been exceedingly good during the year, and the low rate of mortality stated by the Secretary for War last year had been maintained. Abroad, also, the rate of mortality had been below the average. In China a medical officer of rank, Dr. Rutherford, had been attached to the army, simply for the sake of providing for its general health, and in consequence of the care taken during the campaign the mortality of our troops there hardly exceeded that of Aldershott, or other home stations. The effect of the new medical warrant had been to attract a much higher class of candidates for the medical service of the army, and, in fact, medical men now complained that the army drew away all the best young men of the profession.

There had been several reductions in the Staff at home. Two appointments hitherto held by Lieutenant-Generals has been reduced to Major-Generals' commands—the Inspector of Infantry, and the command at Shorncliffe. One Major General, at Dublin, had been reduced, and five Major-Generals' commands had been reduced to Brigadier-Generals' commands—one at Shorncliffe, three at Aldershott, and one at Dublin, and the office of Assistant Adjutant General of the Brigade of Guards would be abolished. These changes had been made with the entire concurrence of the Commander-in-Chief, and this would show that those intrusted with the administration of the army did not lose sight of economy. Another alteration had been made in regard to Staff appointments. Hitherto, when a Major had been appointed to the Staff he was put on half-pay; it was now proposed that he should be seconded. Colonels of the Royal Artillery holding certain large commands would receive command money with the rank of Colonels on the Staff. The War Office had decided to carry out the scheme proposed by the Duke of Cambridge before the Committee on the Organisation of the Army last year. With regard to the entrance of officers into the army, every young gentleman before entering the army would be required to pass a year at a military college in learning the practical rudiments of his profession and some portion of its scientific branches. The education would be physical as well as mental, and every young officer, when he joined his regiment, would be able at once to discharge the functions of an officer without having to learn his drill. This would very much do away with the necessity of keeping young officers at depots, which it would be generally allowed was an advantageous change.

He had now to make such observations as were necessary upon the remaining Votes. In the next, that for the Volunteer Service, an increase of £.38,000 was proposed for the yeomanry. They were to be called out this year, and everybody who had any knowledge of the yeomanry would allow that unless they were called out for permanent duty occasionally the force would soon fall away. A Committee had been recently appointed of yeomanry officers, among whom was the noble Lord who had lately occupied the chair of that House (Lord Eversley) in conjunction with cavalry officers, and it was expected that they would be able to recommend considerable reductions in the expenses of the yeomanry without impairing its efficiency. There was an increase in the charge for the Volunteers this year compared with the last of £27,000, which consisted of pay and allowances to adjutants. He would make but few observations on this occasion upon the subject of the Volunteer force, as the whole question would shortly be brought before the House by the noble Lord the Member for Haddingtonshire (Lord Elcho). He was happy to be able to state that there was no symptoms of the Volunteer movement flagging. During the past year 40,000 men had been added to the force; and at the present moment we had 217 battalions, 130 of which were administrative battalions, formed of corps which had in the course of last year joined together to have the benefit of the services of an adjutant. There were now 1,500 corps, and 140,000 men. Many of the battalions had arrived at a state of very great efficiency, and some of them, he believed, were fit to act with the regular troops. One of those battalions, which was very strongly represented in that House—namely, that connected with the Inns of Court, and composed of gentlemen of the long robe, was perhaps more remarkable for its efficiency than any other of those corps. In the course of the year there had been assemblages of the Volunteers at different places. The gratifying circumstances of the occasion on which Her Most Gracious Majesty reviewed 21,000 men in Hyde Park were still fresh in the recollection of all who witnessed the stirring scene. Scotland had used all its exertions to rival, if not excel, the displays in this country; and at Edinburgh the Queen had inspected as many as 22,000 Volunteers. In Lancashire and other counties similar demonstrations had taken place, and more than 30,000 Volunteers had had the advantage of being reviewed by general officers, who had reported favourably of their efficiency.

He next came to Vote 6 for the War Department. In that Vote there was a small increase, chiefly arising from the annual increase in the salaries. In constructing the War Department out of several different offices, each having the management of a different branch of the service, great difficulties had to be overcome. Ever since the new department was formed the attention of successive Secretaries of State had been directed to the perfecting of its constitution. Much evidence was taken on that subject last year before a Committee of that House, and a plan proposed by the Secretary of State for War was laid before it and approved. He had only now to state that Lord Herbert was now engaged in carrying out that plan with all the care and caution that were necessary in dealing with so large an establishment as the War Office, the object being to have at the head of all the great branches of army administration officers practically acquainted with the departments over which they had to preside, and brought into immediate contact with the Secretary of State, who was responsible to Parliament. Provision had been taken for the appointment of a Director General of Ordnance, who would have the general superintendence of the manufacturing departments at Woolwich, and would advise the Secretary of State in relation to the artillery. The Accountant General's Department would, he hoped, with the assistance of a Treasury Committee, be very shortly placed upon a satisfactory footing. Before leaving the subject of the War Office he ought to state that the system of minuting which was prominently brought under the notice of the Committee had been curtailed, and would yet be curtailed still further.

The Votes for the matériel of the army next followed; and he would observe that the detailed accounts to which the right hon. and gallant Member for Huntingdon had referred had been quite accidentally omitted from the Estimates. They were now laid upon the table and printed. He would take the Votes 7, 8, and 11 together, the first of which included the salaries of the manufacturing establishments, the second the wages, and the last warlike stores. The total amount of the Votes for matériel in 1860–1 was £3,627,327; and here, as in the case of the clothing Vote, he had added a credit from India amounting in this case to £300,000 which was deducted from Vote 11 in the Estimates for 1860–1. The corresponding charge for the year 1861–2 would be £3,459,723, thus showing a decrease of £167,604. The whole of our regular forces, the militia, embodied and disembodied, the Volunteers, and the pensioners had been armed with the Enfield rifle. A quantity of the same weapons had been supplied to the colonies, and the regular troops at home and in the Mediterranean had been provided with the interchangeable rifle, so named because the separate parts of each rifle so exactly corresponded as that any part of one rifle would equally fit another. Thus, in an action where many arms were broken a complete rifle might be formed at once from broken parts of the damaged weapons. Mr. W. Richards's carbines' had been exceedingly well reported of from India as being a very efficient arm for cavalry. He might there mention that in a very short period a trial would take place of the comparative merits of the Whitworth and the Enfield rifles. The Armstrong gun had excited much attention both in the House and the country. He could not accept the figures given by the right hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite, as to the charge for the Armstrong guns, which he had stated at less than £460,000. He would only state to the Committee that the cost of the ammunition, the carriage, and the other appurtenances for the Armstrong gun was greater than the actual cost of the gun itself; and at least £800,000 of the present Estimates would be applied for those guns and their accessories. At the beginning of the financial year 1860–61 the number of Armstrong guns issued for service was 169. In the year about to close there would have been 776 more "proved" and, in most cases, also issued; making a total of 945 Armstrong guns manufactured up to the 1st of April, 1861. In the course of the year ending the 1st of April, 1861, 300,000 rounds of ammunition would likewise have been produced for that description of ordnance at a cost of £220,000. At the commencement of the next financial year the value of materials and of guns in process of manufacture is estimated at £230,000. The whole of the field batteries of the Royal Artillery at home had either been supplied with Armstrong guns, or the guns were in store ready for issue when convenient. To the navy there had been issued 16 100-pounders, 42 40-pounders, 6 25-pounders, and 13 12-pounders, and it might perhaps interest the Committee to know that, though Sir Baldwin Walker could not be intercepted, his ship, the Narcissus, was fully supplied with Armstrong guns. Provision had been taken in the Estimates this year for the manufacture of 1,057 Armstrong guns of the following calibre:—330 100-pounders, 280 40-pounders, 197 25-pounders, and 250 12 pounders. This was independent of a large sum taken to provide for the manufacture of a muzzle-loading gun for the navy, which was to form the naval broadside, this species of gun not being altogether settled at the present moment. Of late the price of the Armstrong gun had much decreased. The practice of buying part of these guns from the Elswick Ordnance Factory, and of manufacturing others, had been found of great advantage for it established a wholesome competition and gave the Government some check as to the price. The Elswick Company had behaved with great fairness. The prices had necessarily been experimental at first, and in one instance they told the Government that the price which was being paid for a certain description of gun was too high, and voluntarily suggested a reduction. The original price of the Impounder was £250; it was now £120. The price of the 40-pounder was at first £350; it had now been reduced to £285; and the cost of the ammunition was likewise being reduced. The experimental character necessarily attaching to the manufacture of the guns had added largely to the expenditure. It might be supposed that when once a 12-pounder had peen tested and proved you had nothing to do but to make bigger guns on the same scale. But it was found that the same proportions would not answer for the 40-pounder; it was only by constant experiment that the proper proportions were arrived at; and nothing could be more interesting than the beautiful contrivances by which Sir William Armstrong had gradually overcome all these difficulties. A good deal had been said respecting the guns used during the recent operations in China. Those guns were inferior in range, accuracy and power to the 12-pounders now issued. They were hastily equipped, without any of the improvements which were now being applied, but still the practical test furnished of their efficiency was eminently satisfactory, and the manner in which they were worked did the greatest credit both to the officers and men engaged. An article in the Mechanics' Magasine purported to give an extract from the report of an officer who served in China, but the information furnished to this periodical was quite inaccurate. The statement was— That though the Armstrong guns under the most favourable circumstances gave very accurate shooting, the casualties to our outlying riflemen Were so serious that the guns were obliged to be withdrawn at the most critical part of the action in which they were engaged. If there had been any foundation for so extraordinary a statement it would certainly have found its way into The Times, but there was not a word of truth in it, and no casualties of the kind ever occurred. The article also alleged That the old service guns had to be advanced in place of the Armstrong 12-pounders, which were pronounced generally inferior to the French rifle gun for purposes of actual warfare. This statement was said to have emanated from Major Hay, an artillery officer in command of one of these batteries. "Now, the only foundation for such an allegation was, that occasionally part of the lead stripped from the shells when fired. No casualty occurred from this cause, but it was reported that inconveniences might arise in firing over the heads of our troops. There was not the slightest difficulty, however, in meeting that defect, either by the use of zinc or by fixing the lead to the shell by a kind of mortice. What Major Hay really said as to the general efficiency of the guns was that, Oil all occasions when required the guns, their screws, &c, were as clean, and in as good working order, as when in England.… Their precision of fire, and the actual results obtained by them, cannot for a moment be doubted. They were the admiration of all. And, again, "As compared with our present guns, the superiority of the Armstrong gun is manifest;" to which he added that they were "superior to the French guns in accuracy and rapidity of fire." Captain Milward, who was in charge of another battery, writing after the disembarkation at Peh-tang, reported all the guns to be "in excellent preservation, and fit for work," and added, This is the eighth time the battery has been embarked or landed since leaving England, each time in boats, mounted and dismounted, never once landed at a wharf, and at Odin Bay landed in a surf. During the whole of these operations no serious damage has occurred to guns or carriages. In regard to the use of the guns in actual service the same officer wrote— The battery in action at Singho, on the 11th of August, fired an average of 18 rounds per gun, at 1,200 and 450 yards, besides two shells at 2,100, all with the most excellent effect. The concussion fuzes acted admirably; the practice was entirely against cavalry in open order, and quite prevented their forming for a charge, which they attempted more than once. The effect of the shells was all that could be desired; the two fired at 2,100 yards dispersing a large body of cavalry instantly. And, again— At the capture of the Peiho Forts (August 21) the guns and carriages stood the firing, which was rapid and continnous, very well indeed. … On the whole I can safely report that little alteration for the better can be made in the gnn, which has acted in every respect up to my anticipations, both in travelling and firing. It is true that on two or three occasions the vent pieces had been blown out. That was a serious defect, but it did not prevent the gun continuing firing, and this defect had since been remedied by Sir William Armstrong in the most simple manner, so that it was now rendered impossible for the future. The only other defect of any consequence arose from the difficulty of manufacturing proper fuzes, but this also had been, he believed, satisfactorily met. In point of strength the Armstrong gun had stood what he believed was a perfectly unique test. A 12-pounder gun was fired 200 times according to the following programme:—10 rounds with service charge of I 1½1b. of powder, and single ser- I vice shot of 12lbs.; 10 rounds with same charge and a projectile equal to two service shot; 10 rounds same charge and a projectile equal to three service shot; and so on, gradually increasing up to 100 rounds, the last ten of which were fired with a projectile equal to ten service shot, and of such a length as to protrude several inches beyond the muzzle. The second 100 rounds were fired with double charges of powder, and with projectiles increasing as before, until they reached ten times the weight of the service shot, and again extended beyond the muzzle of the gun. The gun remained uninjured to the last, and would be issued for service. A 40-pounder of the strengthened pattern had also been tested in a similar manner, and had endured without injury 100 rounds fired with service charges, and projectiles progressively increasing in weight from 40lb. to 400b., the latter forming solid cylinders, which filled the bore to within three inches of the muzzle. These were ' tests which had never been stood by any gun before, and the Ordnance Select Committee were, therefore, right in saying, It may be safely assumed, from the proof, that the Armstrong 12-pounder possesses a degree of strength far beyond any requirement of the service, and that it is practically impossible to burst it by fair means. It had been stated that a 100-pounder Armstrong gun that was tried at Portsmouth had turned out a failure; but this was not correct; the gun was not sent to Portsmouth to be fired, as it had been somewhat injured in proof by a shell bursting at; its mouth; but it so happened that it was fired; but it was not as a trial. The gun was returned to Woolwich with no further defect than before. A similar statement had been made with respect to a 100-pounder Armstrong gun at Shoeburyness; that bad been sent there only for trial, to ascertain if the copper ring at the bouche might be dispensed with. A rather extraordinary experiment had been recently made as to the effect of shot upon the Armstrong gun. A 9-pounder cannon was brought within twenty yards of an Armstrong gun and an ordinary brass fieldpiece, and fired on them. The Armstrong gun which had been damaged before in proof was smashed, and the brass-piece rendered unserviceable. But as no batteries of artillery were ever known to come within twenty yards of each other, the experiment had no practical value; and as they were obliged to go within twenty yards of the Armstrong gun to hit it at all, it showed that it was very difficult to do so. An experiment that had been made with Armstrong and smoothbore cannon against two Martello towers on the Sussex coast had proved very satisfactory. The guns were placed at the same distance against two Martello towers of exactly the same construction, the smooth-bore pieces having the advantage in the weight of shot. From the Armstrong guns 170 rounds were fired:, from the smooth-bore 271. In the tower against which the latter were fired no practicable breach was made, but the wall of the tower exposed to the fire of the Armstrong gun was reduced to a complete ruin. A trial had also recently been made with a segment shell from a 25-pounder Armstrong gun at two iron embrasures, and in a few rounds all the lay figures representing the gun detachment were struck. He did not think he had anything more to state with respect to these pieces; and he would only further remark upon the store Vote that the arsenals were well supplied, and the steam reserve was complete as to guns, ammunition, and stores. This Vote had been largely increased of late years. Nor was this wonderful; the old kinds of weapons were much cheaper than the improved ones, and the ammunition for them was cheaper also. The old Brown Bess musket cost only 30s.; the Enfield rifle cost £2 15s. or £3; a 32-pounder gun cost £56; an Armstrong 40-pounder £285; the ammunition for the 30-pounder 9s. per round; for the Armstrong gun 16sd. 8d.; and there was not only the increased cost of the different arms, but the constant changes in them. But he hoped the expense was now diminishing. When the first cost of replacing one kind of arm by another was once over the expense would be very much reduced.

The Vote for works and fortifications for the present year was very small, and the items would be better discussed when the Vote itself was before the Committee. It was the opinion of the Secretary of State that the expenditure on fortifications should be kept as low as possible; and that in many cases it would only be necessary that the sites of proposed works should be in the possession of the Government, that the works might be constructed as occasion required. The real decrease upon this Vote as compared with 1860–1 was £47,000—although there was a nominal decrease of £437,000—a charge of £390,000 having been transferred to the fortification loan. This fact, which, indeed, was patent upon the face of the Estimates, had not, as the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Huntingdon supposed, escaped notice, for it was naturally alluded to in The Army and Navy Gazette some time since.

In Votes 13 and 14 for Barracks and Civil Buildings, in which there was a. decrease as compared with last year of £44,541. He would only mention in respect to these Votes that provision had been made for extending the school of gunnery at Shoeburyness; it was also proposed to establish in Lancashire a school of musketry, like that at Hythe; this would be a great convenience to officers, and saving of expense to the public on account of the travelling expenses of officers Btationedin the north of England. The improvements already introduced in barracks and hospitals would be continued, and the Committee would readily believe that so long as Lord Herbert presided over the War Department, in no respect would the exertions made to improve the condition of the soldier be diminished. As to that condition he would read an extract from the Report of certain artillery officers who had very recently visited the Continent and reported upon the state of foreign armies. Those officers said that Although in one or two instances a few alterations and improvements suggest themselves which we consider might be advantageously in- troduced into our service, still, on the whole, the condition of foreign soldiers is immeasurably inferior to that of our own; it would not be difficult to mention a large number of advantages un-known to the former which the latter enjoy; commencing with the voluntary enlistment system as opposed to conscription, we might show successively how the personal liberty of the British soldier is better cared for, how the discipline by which he is governed is not only based upon a broader foundation of justice, but is enforced in a far less oppressive and irksome manner, and how his rights, whether as a soldier or -citizen, are secured to him with a certainty and impartiality unknown in Continental armies. We have already noticed the absence of any attempts to ameliorate the position of the foreign soldier, to provide him with amusement during his leisure hours, and of any particular regard for his personal welfare and happiness except where his military efficiency is concerned:—when to this we add that our men are better paid, better clothed, and better fed than those of either France, Sardinia, Austria, Russia or Prussia, we shall have said sufficient to show hove considerably the balance is in favour of the British soldier. With respect to the Votes for non-effective charges it was not necessary to make any observations, as they depended upon causes over which the House had no control; but he might mention one matter which had been alluded to by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Huntingdon (General Peel)—the state of accounts with the Indian Government. A Committee which sat last year had called attention to the inadequate sum paid by the Indian Revenue to meet the dead weight charges imposed upon the Imperial Revenue for the large number of men employed in India. A Committee, consisting of officers selected by the Secretary for India, the Secretary for War, and the Treasury, had met, and had recommended that instead of the present system, by which, under Act of Parliament, £60,000 a year was paid for those charges, a sum of £3 10s. per annum for each effective man in India should be paid out of the Indian revenue. That would give in round numbers £200,000 in aid of the Imperial exchequer. To that proposal the Secretary for India in Council had agreed, and it would be the duty of the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Secretary to the Treasury to introduce a Bill to give effect to that arrangement. It was also proposed to get rid of the complicated accounts between the India Office and the War Office, and that a sum of £10 per effective man in India should be paid in lieu of the detailed charges for depot and other expenses incurred in this country on account of troops serving in India now paid out of the revenues of India. That change would save an immense amount of unnecessary correspondence and delay in the settlement of the army accounts.

Having gone through the Estimates to the best of his ability, he had only to notice the general result. As the right hon. Gentleman (General Peel) had said, there was not, he admitted, a real decrease of £185,795, but he would proceed to explain that so far from there being, as the right hon. Gentleman supposed, an increase as compared with the Estimates of last year, the real decrease was larger than that which appeared upon the face of the account. The apparent decrease was £185,795, to which must be added £500,000 of Indian credits in 1860–61 which he had explained upon the clothing and store Votes, and which raised the decrease to £685,795. On the other hand, the sum of £390,000, being the charge for fortifications transferred to the loan, must be deducted, leaving the real decrease this year at £295,795, as compared with the Estimates of 1860–61. He had only to add that the Estimates had been framed with every regard to economy consistent with the efficiency of the public service. He thought Parliament would not consider a less number of men than were asked for to be necessary, nor that it would be right to interpose any needless delay in completing the improved ordnance for our navy, and, therefore, he thought the Committee would agree that the Estimates proposed were not larger than in the present circumstances of Europe it was proper to submit for army services in the year 1861–2. The hon. Gentleman then moved that the number of troops in the United Kingdom for the ensuing year be 146,044 men.

COLONEL DUNNE

said, he was glad to hear the opinion of the distinguished officers referred to as to the superior advantages enjoyed by the British soldiers over those in foreign armies. But he wished to draw attention to some peculiarities and errors in the Estimates now laid before them. There seemed to be discrepancy between the reduction of money and the reduction of men. He thought also that the Indian and the home accounts had been mixed up together in a most injudicious manner, and then deductions made in a manner utterly confusing. It did not appear to him (Colonel Dunne) that the hon. Gentleman had answered the objection of his hon. and gallant Friend. Ap- parently the hon. Gentleman asked for 146,044 men in this year against 145,269 of last year, or an increase of 775 men. But it was necessary to take the reductions made in this country and to compute them together with the reductions made in India. It appeared from the statements of the hon. Gentleman that six regiments were coming home and the Indian establishment was to be reduced by 16,856 men. Of these at least 10,000 would be transferred to the home establishment. If the six regiments of infantry, and, at the same time, since regiments of cavalry and the artillery were brought home this still left 6,856 men to be reduced in in India in some way or other. About 5,000 or even 6,000 of the Militia force would be actually reduced. But how did the hon. Gentleman explain how the remaining 10,000 men were to be reduced? The ordinary casualties of the year would, of course, reduce the army if no recruiting took place; and Mr. Sidney Herbert next stated the addition to the army each year at about 18,000 men. But the hon. Gentleman, while he proposed to reduce the army by 15,000, asked in his Estimate for recruiting for a sum sufficient to raise a much larger number than would be required. The hon. Gentleman asked £40,000 for recruits. But each recruit costing £4 10s. he could not see how he arrived at that £40,000. How were the men raised to be disposed of? or if recruiting was to be stopped where was the necessity for the Vote? Either there was too much for recruiting or too little for the pay of the troops. The hon. Gentleman had said that the Estimates were framed with a due regard to ecomony. He (Colonel Dunne) did not think this was the case. He thought quite the reverse. He wished to keep the army effective; but he found that while there was a reduction in the effective part of the army, there was an increase in almost every item for the staff and civil service of the army. Last year £13,000 was taken for supernumerary officers of regiments; that was increased this year to £15,000. He thought the system of leaving officers on the strength of regiments who were appointed to the staff, as now proposed, most objectionable, as it obviously afforded an opportunity for favouritism. The system of the reduction of officers had been most capricious and varied at different times. It acted most unfairly. Formerly when cavalry regiments returned from India the two Lieutenant-Colonels and Majors were reduced—sometimes only the latter. At present it is said the Majors are to be left and the second Lieutenant-Colonels reduced. "Why is this distinction made? Two Lieutenant-Colonels—Colonels Ainsdier and Tyler—have been lately reduced. Colonel Tyler has been reduced as Major before, and has seen service in almost every campaign in India. Why should be now be reduced as Lieutenant Colonel? He has already been reduced as Major; but now were he Major and not Lieutenant Colonel he would by the change lately made be retained on the strenth of his regiment. I ask the House and the country are these recollections and changes fair to military men whose professional prospects are dependent on such fantastic caprices? He regretted to see the depot battalions retained. They had been condemned by almost all highly experienced officers, and among others by Lord Sea-ton, who was, perhaps, the highest authority on the subject, and who had written a pamphlet against the system. The £62,480 for recruiting was an increase on last year of £6,054, and on the entire expenses of the recruiting staff there was a considerable increase. If they could recruit during the whole of the Crimean war with the staff they then had he could not see any cause for that increase. Then, also, hospital expenses had been raised. No doubt it would be said that this was in order to promote the comfort of the men; but a case had not, in his opinion, been made out for the increase of the Estimate. These expenses used formerly to be paid out of soldiers' stoppages; not that he (Colonel Dunne) approved of stoppages for any purpose, whether for hospital, for food, for forage, or for clothing; stoppages were bad in principle. The soldier ought in all cases to know what he was going to receive instead of the amount depending upon accident, the state of his health, or in any other requirement. This system also led to a most objectionable multiplication of accounts and an increase in the civil department of the army. The pay of the number of clerks employed on account of stoppages would nearly compensate for their amount. He would pass over the vote for the administration of martial law* but he could not pass over that for the movement of troops* Our troops were now for the most part concentrated in large camps, at Aldershott, the Curragh, and elsewhere; there was, con- quently less movement of troops than usual; yet these economical Estimates showed an increase of £42,000 under that head. The next extravagance was the Staff. In 1815, when the number of men Was upwards of 800,000, and when the Commander-iii1Chief, the Duke of York, received the pay of a Field Marshal, which was about £6,000 a year, the Staff of the Commander-in-Chief amounted to £19,870 a year. Now, with only 146; 000 men, and his Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge not receiving much more than half the sum paid to the Duke of York in 1815, the Staff of the Commander-in-Chief was £14,920. Then the cost of the civil department appeared monstrous; £201,823 was out of all proportion. It was true that the Ordnance had been separate from the army head-quarters; but even allowing for that, he could not see why the amount now asked for should be so great. He then came to the appointment of Inspector of Cavalry. To this there could be no objection; it was a special service, and this duty was essential to the preservation of the efficiency of the army. He also approved of there being a Director of Artillery. But he could not see the use of a General Inspector of the Guards; it was unworthy of that distinguished body to need the inspection of General Officers. As to the Inspector of Infantry, the Committee would be surprised to hear that he never is allowed to inspect a regiment of infantry; his duties were confined to the inspection of dep6ts. If depots were ab-abolished the occupation of the Inspector would be gone; and if not why were the Generals of districts not as competent to inspect a depot of infantry as an infantry regiment? He thought that the present enormous Staff ought to be reduced if economical principles were to be carried out. There was an immense Staff of Inspectors of Volunteers which appeared increased from last year in the present Estimate. Why could not the Volunteers be inspected by the Generals commanding the districts; or by field-officers detached from regiments in those districts, as were those who inspected the yeomanry force? That could be done without any expense at all. He did not think the Estimates had been framed in that spirit of economy which had been promised by the noble Lord to a deputation of Members of that House, very few of whom he (Colonel Dunne) saw present now that the Estimates were brought on for discussion. In fact, the House would find an increase almost on every item which even if, on each considered, small, yet added up came to a considerable sum. He had already suggested a reduction of at least £250,000, and, he thought, fulfilled his promises of pointing out to the hon. Gentleman a sum four times the amount of the stoppages from the ill-paid cavalry officers for the forage of their horses, and yet he had not even touched on those establishments and manufactories under the War Department, in which, he believed, there was a wide field for our army. The hon. Gentleman had alluded to the clothing of the army. Now last Session he (Colonel Dunne) had moved for a return which would have shown how much the Government paid for the coat of a soldier. That return had never been made, the reason being, he believed, that the Government were so badly informed on the subject they could not make it. He had been informed that the new clothing cost 40 per cent more than it did formerly. But the Government seemed to him to know nothing about it; and yet this department was under the super intendance of able officers, who, he did not doubt, could at once give any information required. The hon. Gentleman had talked about the Armstrong guns, and he was perfectly right in saying that we must go to a great expense for those guns. The hon. Gentleman had referred to the Impounders only, as if there were no other guns; but he had said nothing about 9-pounders. Were there not 9-pounder Armstrong guns to be used, and guns of various calibre already made? With regard to rifles, in 1853 a new rifle was adopted, and every year since enormous sums had been expended in the manufacture of rifles. He believed that ever since the union of the Ordnance and War Departments no less a sum than £4,000,000 must have been voted for the purchase of rifles, or for the cost of the manufactories and machinery for making them. He would like to know what had become of all the rifles? There ought to be more than enough for an army of double our force. No doubt a great many might have been lost in the Crimea and in India; but a return ought to be laid on the table of the House every year of the number of rifles lost. What was called the Reserve Fund was likewise a matter deserving the serious attention of the House, and he hoped some account of that fund would be laid before the House. The House, perhaps, was not aware that during and since the Crimean war the War Department, while appointing Commissioners and holding out to the public that it was about to abolish or at least discourage the existence of sale and purchase of commissions in the army, was actually at the time itself selling commissions, and then formed what they called a reserve fund, very useful for their own manipulations of commissions, but of very doubtful utility either to the service or the country. The Committee on the Organization of the Army, presided over by the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for Carlisle, came to the conclusion that a fund of this kind might be attended with danger if it were not brought under the supervision of that House. He had run hastily through these Estimates on the present occasion, but as there came to be voted he should take the opportunity of examining and discussing many of them in detail. Neither his judgment nor his professional feelings—call them even prejudices-—would lead him in the least to recommend the smallest decrease in the efficiency of the service; but he thought that if the country voted larger sums for that service at least it had the right to see that those sums were efficiently and economically expended; and still further, the War Department was bound to give the House all information on the subject which could not prejudice the public services.

MR. W. WILLIAMS,

after complimenting the hon. Gentleman, the Under Secretary for War, on the able and clear statement he had made to the House, said he wished to ask whether there was any other nation that paid so much for war establishments as England in a time of peace? Why was England burdened with such enormous cost for military establishments? No country in Europe had any idea of attacking us; nor were we called upon to assist any other nation in any quarrel in which they might be engaged. Great pains were taken to impress on the public mind that we had something to fear from France; but our military force was greater than that of of France. The right hon. and gallant General, the Member for Huntingdon, recently stated that we had a military and naval force consisting of 600,000 men, including that in India and the colonies. With our Volunteers and the Irish constabulary we had a military force of 380,000 in the United Kingdom. Now, what was the force of France? Not long since the Emperor had stated in an official document that it amounted to 400,000, of which 20,000 were gens-d'armes. 100,000 men were away in different parts, leaving the actual force in France at 300,000. Now, was it likely, under these circumstances, that the Emperor of the French had any idea of invading us? Even if he did, it was proved beyond dispute in the debate on the Navy Estimates that our men and ships were double those of France. He was sorry to observe that the present Government was the most extravagant that had ever ruled over this country. Taking the proposed Army Estimates of £14,600,000, and comparing them with those of former Governments, he found that in the last year of the Duke of Wellington's Administration they amounted to £7,900,000; under Lord Grey to £8,110,000; under Lord Melbourne to £7,800,000; under Lord John Russell in 1851 and 1852 £8,823,000. Taking the seven years he had referred to of previous Administrations, the average amount of the Estimates of those years was £6,600,000 less than was required for this year. Some explanation ought to be given of this enormous increase. He looked upon the Yolunteers as of immense benefit to the country, and as our great means of defence. With them we did not require such an immense standing army. If he had thought it would be of any use in the present temper of the House he would move for a large reduction of these Estimates. But he did advise the House to make a stand against this enormous expenditure. He believed, if these Estimates were referred to a Committee of five independent Gentlemen, who would thoroughly investigate them, millions might be saved without in the least diminishing the efficiency of the army. He thought it was a most unjust course on the part of the Government to borrow money to erect fortifications.

COLONEL DICKSON

said, he had observed that the ideas of the hon. Member for Lambeth with regard to the numbers of our army became more expansive every year. How the hon. Member could make out that we had nearly 400,000 men under arms he was at a loss to conceive. Although he (Colonel Dickson) had not been in the House so long as the hon. Under Secretary for War, he would take the liberty of observing that in making his statement he had displayed an amount of ability which showed that his right hon. Friend (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had no occasion to throw his protective ægis around him; but great as was the ability which the hon. "Under Secretary had displayed he had failed to convince him (Colonel Dickson) that in framing these Estimates the Government had paid the slightest regard to considerations of economy; and it was not because he happened to sit on the Opposition benches, but as an independent Member he felt it his duty to protest against the expenditure, which he thought was totally unwarrantable and unjustifiable when it was considered in proportion to the number of men they had. He was not in favour of reducing the number of the army by a single man; that he believed would be the worst of all false economy; but he had looked back to the Estimates of 1853 and 1854, when they were admitted to be on the eve of the Russian war, and he had compared them with the expenditure of the present time. He had not done this because he entertained so Utopian an idea that they would be able to return to the smaller expenditure of former years; for as the nation increased in wealth and in power, and as it became senssible of the necessity of making better provision for the comfort of the men, the expense must of necessity increase; but he did not see why the increase should have been so great as it had been, or why, in 1853 and 1854, they should have paid £9,700,000 for 119,881 men, and why, in 1861 and 1862, they should be called upon to pay £14,600,009 for 146,044 men. Instead of there being a reduction of £186,000, if they added to the Estimates for the year the cost of fortifications and some other little matters, they would find that the sum they would have to provide for the military establishments would amount to nearly £16,000,000. This was a state of things which he thought it was high time they should put a stop to. In his statement the hon. Under Secretary alluded to another branch of the subject, which was fairly past the consideration of the House—that was their warlike stores for land and sea use. Whilst they could always improvise men they could not want the stores, and therefore they must always keep a large stock, and lose no opportunity of adopting all the implements which from time to time were made in warlike improvements; but he found in the Estimates of 1853 and 1854 that the cost for stores for land and sea use was £374,697, and now it was put down. at £2,200,581. This was an increase he saw no reason for. Again there was an increase of £39,472 in the costs of the departments of the Commander-in-Chief and the Secretary of State. They had been given to understand that the formation of the office of Secretary of State for War would lead to economy in the departments; but he found that, including the charge for postage, the united office cost £80,000 more than the offices of the Secretary at War and the Ordnance Office in 1853–4. Of course, the increase of expenses on account of the Volunteer corps no one would begrudge, if it was kept within any reasonable limits. They had been told that the cost of the army might be closely calculated by adding two "0's" to the number of the men. That might be; but why, he should like to know, were they this year to pay at the rate of £100 per man, when in 1853 and 1854 they paid £75 per man? The additional £25 per man made a difference on the whole of £4,000,000, which would make a very nice little deduction from the income tax, which they would neither be willing nor able much longer to pay. They were only asked for 775 more men, and yet the items for extra provisions, fuel, forage, &c, came to £178,457, or above £250 per man. He merely referred to this as showing the extravagant manner in which these Estimates were made up. The hon. Under Secretary had said he proposed to decrease the cavalry. He hoped the Government were not serious in this. A cavalry soldier cost a good deal of money to make, and when made ought not to be lightly cast aside. Moreover, there was no necessity to decrease the number of men; all that was required was to decrease the expense; and if his hon. Friend the Under Secretary would refer to a light publication (as there had been references to several publications during the evening), namely, Punch, he would see there a woodcut representing the state of the navy which was equally applicable to the army. It was not the fighting men but the thinking men who were so expensive. The hon. Gentlemen took great credit for the clothing establishment; but say that it took a fortnight to fit out seven battalions, that did not speak very well for it, as private establishments would readily do that in a week, and had done it in less. He heard with great regret of the idea of establishing a school and college for young men. This system was, he thought, a monstrous one—it was following too much the foreign plan; and the fact of its being compulsory on young men to enter these colleges would deter many from joining the army at all. The great Duke said that he wanted gentlemen, and he would undertake to make them soldiers. This college he (Colonel Dickson) thought was a mistake. He hoped the Estimates would be well canvassed. Where the reforming band of fifty were he did not know. The country was getting sick of the expenditure which was going on, and if the same apathy was continued by the House he thought it would be a good reason for extending the suffrage.

SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE

wished to ask for an explanation of one point in the hon. Gentleman's statement. The Estimates showed a net decrease of £185,000 compared with the expenditure of last year; but they had been told that the decrease was really much larger, because there were sums amounting to £500,000 to be written off from the Indian credits of last year. He wanted to know what this meant. In Vote 9, for the clothing department, the sum voted last year was £524,000, but the sum required here was but £325,000, and the difference, £200,000, was set off as a credit for clothing supplied to the Indian Government. This, it appeared, was to be done no longer. Hitherto we had provided a larger quantity of clothing for our own army than was required, in order to send some of it to India. But was it intended that in future the Indian Government should get its own stores and clothing directly for itself, instead of getting them through the medium of the War Office? If so, that would be no real saving. He wished to know whether the Treasury had authorized any shifting of these accounts from the War Department to the Indian Department during the past year.

SIR FREDERIC SMITH

said the statement made by the Under Secretary for War was so clear that it left room for but few questions. He would, in the first place, congratulate the War Office on the improvements they are represented to have made in their mode of keeping the accounts and correspondence. He had given notice at the close of last Session of his intention to move for a Select Committee early in the present Session to take into consideration the defective mode which existed in the War Department of conducting the accounts and correspondence; but if the heads of that department were now engaged in the necessary reform he should wait to see the result. On the whole he should assent to these Estimates, and as he approved of the number of men it was proposed to have, other items of expenditure must to a certain degreee follow. But he should object to some of the details when the time came; and that some economy might be effected in these matters by the House of Commons was evident from the reduction they had obtained in the remounts of the cavalry. Now, in a few days, they would have to come to the Votes on fortifications. He hoped the hon. Gentleman would then give the House some details as to what had been done with the £2,000,000 voted in August last. He should ask whether it had been partly or wholly expended, and whether the works yet had been commenced or the plans approved; because, if they had not been extensively carried on, the House might now decide to stop their progress, and he would try to induce the House to do so. Seven months had now passed since the £2,000,000 were voted for those fortifications, and a particular account should be given of them, for in August next he supposed the hon. Gentleman would be asking for £2,000,000 more. There were some items in the Estimate to which he entertained objections; but, on the whole, he was prepared to give it his support. It was his intention, however, to give notice of a Motion to reduce the item for the movement of troops by £70,000, as he did not see why more should be paid under that head in the ensuing financial year than in that which was just closing. He was glad to perceive that some reduction had taken place in the cost of cavalry horses, and he attributed this good result to the Motion for a Return which he had made some time since. As for the Armstrong guns, the report we had heard of their failure in China proved, he rejoiced to find, to be perfectly unfounded; but in the experiment made at Woolwich, it appeared from a statement of the hon. Gentleman, in reply to questions about it, that one of those guns was destroyed at a distance of twenty yards. The construction of those guns was indeed a wonder, and quite worthy of this country and of that ingenious man who had invented them; but it would be as well, before incurring enormous expenses for their manufacture, to ascertain what their defects might be, be- cause if they were more brittle than ordinary guns, Sir William Armstrong ought to provide a remedy in time. Their powers in throwing shot and shell had been sufficiently proved, but what remained to be proved was the amount of their resistance to injury from shot fired at them. He trusted the War Department would give their attention to this important matter.

MR. T. G. BARING,

in reply to the various questions that had been asked, said that the House would probably be of opinion that minor points connected with the Army Estimates might be more advantageously discussed when the time came for voting the items in detail. With regard, however, to the observations of the hon. and gallant Member for the Queen's County (Colonel Dunne) he could only assure him, on the part of his Department, that there was no wish to withhold information, and that the Return he asked for would be presented before the clothing Vote was taken. He was sorry to hear that in the opinion of the gallant Officer the Member for the county of Limerick (Colonel Dickson) to educate officers for the army at a college was objectionable. Such an education, however, was similar to that which most hon. Members had received at Oxford or Cambridge, and to the course of education undergone by distinguished officers in the Indian service; and he could not see, therefore, why it should be unsuited for officers in Her Majesty's service. He admitted that the Estimates of 1861–62, as compared with those of 1853–54, exhibited an increase; but he contended that the calculations based on this comparison had had not been fairly presented to the House. The number of men voted to a great extent influenced the whole of the remaining items. In 1853–54 the men voted were, in round numbers, 120,000; while in 1861–62 they were 146,000. The total Estimates for the former year was about £9,500,000, and, observing the same proportionate rate of increase, they should in 1861–62 have amounted to £11,000,000. He had, therefore, to account in the coming financial year for an excess of £3,500,000 over that amount. But on looking into the particular Votes, he found an increase of £2,400,000 for warlike matériel, consequent in a great measure in the changes which had unavoidably been made in small arms and ordnance. For provisions the increase was £580,000, as between the two Estimates; but the Com- mittee must bear in mind that this increase mainly arose from the improvements which had taken place in the condition of the soldier, and which were really equivalent to an increase in his pay. Seeing that the rate of pay for agricultural and almost every othre description of labour had of recent years undergone so great a change it would be absurd to maintain that that of the soldier should be kept at a standstill. The votes of the House of Commons had also from time to time necessitated an augmentation of our expenditure for military purposes; for instance, there was an increase of £35,000 in the pay of sergeants in consequence of such a vote. In conclusion, he had simply to express a hope-that the Committee, with a view to the convenience of the public service, would allow him to take the Votes for the number of men, and that for pay and allowances, which it was expedient should be passed that evening.

COLONEL KNOX

said, he did not wish to reduce the number of men in the army, but he did wish to reduce the expenditure. As to the proposition that young men should be obliged to go into a college for one year's probation before entering the army, he looked upon that proposition with considerable alarm, though he quite admitted that everybody of any experience in the army was anxious to do away with the depot battalions. It was not the Military Departments, but the Civil Departments, that were eating them up, by causing increased Estimates. Under the old system, when we had four times the number of men that we now had under arms, the number of clerks employed was only a sixth that now employed, and their pay and allowances were very large. Since the change which had been effected in the War Office in 1855, the number of clerks throughout the service had been considerably augmented, and they, and not the officers of the army, it was who were eating up the money voted by Parliament. A captain did not receive nearly so much as a second-class clerk, nor an ensign as a third-class clerk. There was one office which had been made during the past year, that of précis writer to the War Office, and this increased the expenditure £1,000 a-year, though similar officials in the Foreign Office were not remunerated in so handsome a manner. There were also things put down in these Estimates which should not be charged as military expenses, such as £15,000 a-year for police, aides-de camp to civil Governors, £3,000 or £4,000 a-year, besides forage for horses, and the Staff of the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland. One word as to the movement of troops, for there was a very large increase under that head. He could not understand why there should be this enormous expense for the movement of troops at home. We had also a very large increase under the head of recruiting, though the recruiting was bonâ fide stopped. Then, again, there was an increase in the expense of the hospital department. He should be very sorry to object to anything which would ameliorate the condition of the soldier, and he could not help saying, in passing, that no other army ever went on foreign service so efficiently equipped, especially as to the medical department, as the army we had sent to China. But the China war was now over. Under the head of medical staff alone there was an increase of £10,323, and on the hospital Vote there was an increase of £40,000. The charge for the administration of martial law was also high. He agreed that the army should be kept in an as efficient state as possible, and he repeated that he believed that the only place in which to make a reduction in expenditure was in the Civil Departments. When the new War Department was created, the Government gave a pledge that they would furnish a full and detailed account of its duties and the probable expense, but that statement had never been laid before the House. As to the clothing of the soldiers, nobody could deny that it had very much improved but it had also very much increased in expense.

MR. HENLEY

complained that the Under Secretary of State for War had lumped together the non-effective and effective services, than which no more effectual method of throwing dust in the eyes of the Committee could be devised. In the year 1853–4 our army numbered 120,000 men, and the charge for the effective service was about £7,500,000. This year we were to have 144,000 or 145,000 men at a charge of something like £12,500,000 for the effective service. Thus, while the increase in the number of men was only 21 or 22 per cent., the increase of charge was 60 per cent. This extravagance ran through every branch of the Estimates. When the different army offices were consolidated the country was promised in- Creased efficiency, and very naturally some economy was also expected. Instead of the latter anticipation being realized, however, the expense of the War Department had risen from £120,000 to £195,000, or about 60 per cent. He did not think that we had a man too many in the army; but if that army was to be maintained at a constantly increasing charge he was afraid that in a little while the country would become dissatisfied with the expense, and a rush would be made to cut down the number of men to a dangerously low point as the only mode of diminishing the expenditure. He had seen such things happen before, and he did not wish to see them again. He did not think that the increase of charge could be entirely accounted for by the change of our ordnance. He thought that a good deal of it was the result of the extravagant habits which the War Department had contracted during the Crimean War. We were then borrowing millions of money, and we did not care what we spent. We had a great object to achieve, and we spent money recklessly to achieve that object. Expensive habits once formed were not easily eradicated. The Government and heads of Departments knowing more about these matters than anybody else were always able to explain away any disagreeable details; but the country would soon get sick of this, for the people did not like paying taxes, and they would call for a reduction in the number of men. He, for one, deeply grieved that this should be so. There was stated to be a decrease upon the Estimates this year of £185,000, but that decrease was rather apparent than real, as it arose from there being no Vote for the militia and the fortifications being charged to another account. It was very easy for the Government to defend the items in that House, but the country would look to the general result; and, in his opinion, some economy might be effected by more judicious management.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

Sir, everybody seems to be agreed that the number of men asked for is not greater than the interests of the country require, and all who understand military matters admit that the number of men in a great degree governs the aggregate expense of the army. Everybody, I think, is also agreed that the extended application of science to instruments of warfare, that is the introduction of great improvements in cannon—muskets, and other things used in military opera- tions—must, during the period of transition at least, cause a very great increase of expense. Now, if hon. Members look at these Estimates they will find that a great portion of the increase as compared with former periods arises, first, from the addition to the number of men; and, secondly, from the change of the implements of war. But, besides that, hon. Gentlemen ought to bear in mind that certainly no Session passes, and not many months in any Session pass, without Members getting up and proposing good, but at the same time expensive, changes in arrangements connected with the army. One Member presses upon the House the necessity of improving the barrack accommodation for the soldiers; another says the clothing is defective in quality and ought to be improved; a third states that the hospital accommodation is not what it should be; and others that various other changes ought to be made to render the condition of the soldiers more fitting the improved temper and habits of the times. All these alterations, good though they may be, are attended with more or less increase of expense, and when they come to be put together in a great aggregate they tend of course to swell the Estimates. But I do not think that anybody will be of opinion that these augmentations of expense are not usefully incurred. We are now told that the Civil Departments are extravagantly conducted, and those military Gentlemen, who see the increase of expense and who want to turn off the attention of the House from the fact that a great part of that increase arises from military considerations, wish to throw the whole blame upon the Civil Departments. They say there is a most extravagant increase in the Civil Departments. That is a matter which the Committee will consider when we come to those Votes. If they can show that there are augmentations in the Civil Departments which are not required for expediting the public business it will be for the Committee to interpose. With respect, however, to the consolidation of the Military Departments I must beg leave to say that there never was a greater improvement made in the organization of any branch of the public service. In former times there was a Secretary of State who combined the War Department and the Colonies. There was a Secretary at War who also had charge of the Accountant's Department of the Army, There was a Commander-in-Chief who also had the Medical Department under him. The Treasury had the Commissariat, and there was a separate Ordnance Department. I need not say that there was a confusion and a clashing between these different departments which proved exceedingly embarrassing to the public service. The consolidation of these departments under one head—the Secretary of State for War—has been an immense improvement in the administration of our military affairs. It may for the moment have rendered necessary an increase in some of the branches of the Civil Departments; but I venture to say that when the matter comes to be looked into the House will find that, even if there has been a temporal increase in some parts of the administration, the efficiency of the military service has been immensely promoted by the introduction of the new system.

MR. MONSELL

did not think that the noble Lord had entirely answered the judicious remarks of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley), that the real cause of alarm was this gradual increase that was going on from year to year in those military Estimates. As the right hon. Gentleman had observed, for the sake of the service and of avoiding the revulsion of feeling which ' must arise if that system were to continue, they ought well to consider every single item in those Estimates. They were all agreed that the number of men was not too large at present; and the Under Secretary for War had well accounted for £2,500,000 increase in connection with the increase in the number of men. But there was one part of his remarks not so satisfactory. He stated in round numbers that the increase in warlike stores demanded for this year would amount to about £2,500,000. Now that enormous expenditure had been going on, not for one or two, but for four or five and even six years, and as there had been no expenditure of those stores, there must be an enormous accumulation of them. When they were about to create those establishments at Woolwich, which had been entirely successful, one of the arguments which had the greatest weight -with the House was that by having this enormous productive power in their hands they should be able to get up their stores in a few months even if they were low. Therefore they had now got the means of producing enormously almost every species of warlike stores; yet still, after a large expenditure had gone on for several years, they were this year called upon for a larger sum by about £160,000 or £200,000 for those establishments than last year. Before they voted that sum they ought to have a full explanation as to the state of their stores at present, and the productive power of the establishments. They ought to hesitate before allowing this enormous expenditure to go on from year to year. He sincerely believed if this enormous expenditure were to go on increasing in this way there would be a tremendous revulsion, and that before long they would be left without a sufficient supply of money voted by that House to meet the wants of the country.

MR. CONINGHAM

was convinced that the statement made by the right hon. and gallant Member for Huntingdon (General Peel), that the present Estimates might be regarded as our peace establishment, would sink deeply into the public mind. Whatever might be the opinion of the country as to Parliamentary Reform, there was but one opinion that the expenditure had reached that point where it must be stopped. The Under Secretary for War said that it was satisfactory to have a Government establishment for the manufactory for Armstrong guns; but the Government had also entered into a contract with the Elswick firm. The arrangement was however so extravagant that the prices had been reduced. He was certain that if all the contracts entered into by the War Department were similar to those concluded by the Treasury it would be impossible to conceive arrangements more profligate and wasteful. He was not inclined to leave the country defenceless, but he was convinced that our military forces might be maintained in an equally efficient state as at present with a largely reduced expenditure.

MR. FRANK CROSSLEY

thought that great credit was due to the Under Secretary for the ability he had shown in explaining the Estimates to the Committee. From comparison it appeared that we were now spending £3,500,000 more than was required by the increase of men since 1853–54. Part of that enormous increase, no doubt, arose from the public manufacturing establishments. He did not agree that we had saved anything by the Government factories. Governments were the worst manufacturers and agriculturists in the world, and all they wanted should be supplied by private individuals under a system of open competition. The coun- try really could not afford so large an expenditure. They could not increase the taxation. Were they prepared to add to the National Debt? He wished that the country should be kept in a proper state of defence; he did not think we had too many men at present, nor that we overpaid them, for wages were general on the rise; the clothing of the army was better now than formerly, but he suspected that it cost us a great deal more money than when it was supplied by the colonels. But he was a sanguine man, indeed, who could look forward to such a state of prosperity as we had enjoyed of late years. He believed that much greater economy might be exercised in both services, without impairing their efficiency.

MR. LIDDELL

wished to make a remark upon the observations of the hon. Member for Brighton (Mr. Coningham). The statement of that hon. Member was liable to misapprehension. He seemed to infer that we had entered into so bad a contract with the Elswick Company that we had since reduced the terms for making the Armstrong guns; but he (Mr. Liddell) would remind the Committee that the reduction in price was volunteered by Sir William Armstrong himself.

MR. T. G. BARING

explained that when the Elswick Company found they were able to produce guns at a cheaper rate, because they were now of an uniform shape, and not subject to so many alterations as formerly, they voluntarily made the reduction The contract was not an extravagant one; but it was very creditable to the company that they had given the Government the benefit of the greater economy in the production of the weapon.

MR. WALPOLE

observed, that it was said by an hon. Gentleman on the other side of the House (Mr. Coningham) that this was to be considered a peace Estimate. He was afraid that statement would cause considerable alarm as to the prospective expenditure of the country. What he understood the Under Secretary for War to state was something different from what the hon. Member for Brighton understood. He (Mr. Walpole) understood the hon. Gentleman to state that the charge for military stores, which had so much increased, was owing to the transition state through which, as the noble Viscount said, they were passing. He wished to ask whether, when they had passed through that transition state, these Estimates ought not to be reduced in a year or two by say £2,000,000? He wished, also, to ask another question. In the Report of the Army Organization Committee there was a fund mentioned called the Reserve Fund, which arose from the sale of commissions, which was disposed of and properly applied by the Secretary of State to the relief of what he might call the dead-weight expenses, of which no account was rendered to that House. The Army Organization Committee had recommended that a proper account of the distribution of that money should be appended to the Estimates; and he wanted to know when that recommendation would be carried into effect?

MR. T. G. BARING

replied, that it was the intention of the Secretary for War to furnish an account of the Reserve Fund. He had examined the Vote for stores for the coming year very minutely and carefully, and he anticipated that a considerable reduction in the Vote might be made in 1862–3, and a still greater reduction in the following years.

MR. H. B. JOHNSTONE

complained of the inconsistency of hon. Members on both sides of the House who demanded expensive reforms and improvements in the army, and then grumbled when they had to pay the bill. Reduction of expenditure was a popular cry on the hustings; but he begged the Committee to remember how much it cost to render our army and navy effective at the time of the Crimean war, owing to the miserable state into which those services had been allowed to fall. Considering the state of the Continent we ought to be prepared for every contingency; and he trusted that as we were now getting a good article in the shape of weapons the country would not grudge the price.

COLONEL DUNNE

said, that considerable expense had been rendered requisite of late years for putting the military departments into a proper state of perfection. When he went into office under Lord Derby there was hardly a gun among the Ordnance stores that was fit for field service. He thought the Votes ought not to be further proceeded with at that hour.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

trusted that the House would proceed to Vote the men and their pay and allowances that evening.

Vote agreed to.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £4,780,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge of the Pay and Allowances of Her Majesty's Land Forces, at Home and Abroad, exclusive of India, which will come in course of payment from the 1st day of April 1861 to the 31st day of March, 1862, inclusive.

COLONEL DUNNE

moved that the Chairman report Progress. He said the understanding with the noble Lord at the head of the Government was that he only wanted to vote for the men, in order to enable the Government to introduce the Mutiny Bill. If they passed this Vote they would be precluded from debating the Estimates any more with a view to economical reductions. He submitted that further time should be given for the discussion of the details.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, he had made no such engagement. The engagement he proposed applied to Monday last, not to to-night at all. It was absolutely necessary that the present Vote should be taken for pay and allowances to officers and men. It did not apply to the Civil Department, to the stores, or to any of those matters which had chiefly been discussed to-night. The Committee, having voted the men, could not refuse the money with which to pay them. He should take the sense of the House on the question.

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do report progress, and ask leave to sit again.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 22; Noes 122: Majority 100.

Original Question again proposed,

COLONEL KNOX

contended that if they agreed to this Vote they would be prevented making any considerable reduction in the Estimates. He objected to the amount for depôt battalions.

MR. T. G. BARING

informed the hon. and gallant Member that his objection applied to Vote No. 3, and not to the present one, which was No 2.

COLONEL KNOX

considered it was monstrous to go on discussing such enormous Estimates at that advanced hour of the night. He objected to the increase of the item for the medical staff, and moved that the Vote be reduced by £50,000.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £4,730,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge of the Pay and Allowances of Her Majesty's Land Forces, at Home and Abroad, exclusive of India, which will come in course of payment from the 1st day of April, 1861, to the 31st day of March, 1862, exclusive

MR. T. G. BAKING

said, that these charges also formed part of another Vote.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

COLONEL DICKSON

said, it was quite evident that the Committee could not properly discuss those Votes at that hour of the night. He had certainly understood the arrangement entered into with the noble Viscount in the same way as the hon. and gallant Member for Portarlington (Colonel Dunne). He told hon. Members if they went on voting this money away without due consideration, all idea of economy would be utterly useless. Surely the noble Viscount could not say that it was necessary the whole of this enormous sum of nearly £5,000,000 should be voted away at that moment, when the hour of midnight had passed.

MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH

thought the Government ought not to proceed further to-night. The Vote was nearly £5,000,000 and it ought to be divided into portions.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

would be very unwilling to ask the Committee to decide at once on a matter which might be open to discussion. The money was much wanted. He would propose to take a Vote for one-half on account.

Original Question, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman then put the Vote

(2.) £3,000,000, on account, Pay and Allowances, Land Forces.

Vote agreed to.

House resumed.

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.

Committee to sit again To-morrow.