HC Deb 10 March 1862 vol 165 cc1247-59

Resolutions reported.

(2.) £334,151, Manufacturing Departments.

SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY

said, he had on a previous occasion put a question to the Secretary for War as to whether certain arrangements had been made with respect to the War Office accounts, in conformity mainly with the recommendations of the Committee on Military Organization; but the right hon. Gentleman in his reply entirely passed over the chief points to which the question related. What he wanted to know was, whether the right hon. Gentleman, or any of the officers under him, knew the cost of the raw materials of the articles manufactured in his department, and the total cost of those articles? It was quite clear, unless the right hon. Baronet knew the cost of the raw material, he could not tell the cost of the article produced; and if he did not know the cost of the article, he could not say that he could manufacture it more cheaply than the same article could he obtained by contract. He wanted to know, therefore, whether the system of the War Office accounts, embraced all the accounts of the department, both chief and subsidiary, so that the right hon. Gentleman could state what was the money value of the several articles produced?

SIR GEORGE LEWIS

The manufactures carried on under the direction of the War Department are on a very large scale, and the number of articles produced in the course of a year is very great. The whole matter is very properly a subject of jealous inquiry on the part of this House, and I think, therefore, the hon. Baronet's question is perfectly legitimate.

Now, Sir, my belief is that the accounts of the different manufacturing departments of the War Office are kept in a very complete and regular manner. Of course, I have no personal experience or knowledge of the matter myself; I can only derive my information from those who superintend those departments. They assure me that the system of accounts is complete and trustworthy, and that there will be by the 1st of April next a balance-sheet of each of those departments. When all those balance-sheets are prepared, I shall lay them on the table in a complete series, and then the House will be able to judge for itself how far those accounts are kept in a satisfactory manner. As to the particular question of the hon. Baronet, whether we are in a condition to state the precise value of each class of articles, my answer is that we are in a condition to state the amount of wages expended on each article, and the cost of the raw material. There is then the ulterior question, what percentage should be added for the plant, the capital, and superintendence? Now, it is much more difficult for Government to make an estimate of those items than for a private manufacturer. There is, also, some annual allowance to be made for the diminution in the value of the machinery. Opinions differ as to the percentage which ought to be added for those heads. I believe, however, on the whole, that the department is in a condition to give an accurate estimate of the price of all the different articles which it manufactures.

(6.) £2,060,276, Warlike Stores.

SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY

said, he was surprised to find that the stores had been sent out to Canada, not in the summer or the autumn, but in the winter of last year, when their conveyance had involved a large additional expense. In the course of the summer things seemed to wear an unpleasant appearance between Mr. Seward, the American minister, and the Foreign Office in this country, and he had been informed that the Canadian government had then asked, not for troops, but for stores, and more especially for arms.

SIR GEORGE LEWIS

said, he thought that his noble Friend at the head of the Government had on a former occasion sufficiently explained why reinforcements were not sent out to Canada in the autumn, that reason being that the Canadian Government did not desire that reinforce- ments should be sent to Canada at that time.

SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY

explained that he had only referred to stores.

SIR GEORGE LEWIS

said, that the only ground for sending out more stores than were required for the troops then in Canada would have been in order that the militia might be armed. No doubt the Government might have taken that course, but the militia were not then in a state of activity, and Government did not then apprehend any hostilities with the United States.

(8.) £158,128, Civil Buildings,

COLONEL DICKSON,

adverting to the item of £26,100 for the purchase of part of Mr. Dimes's new factory at Pimlico, said, that the House might naturally suppose that the Government proposed to purchase a building already rented and used, but he believed that the building in question was one in the course of construction for the purposes of the Government; and, after the order for it had been given, the House was asked to pay a sum of £26,000. If arrangements of that kind were made without the cognizance of the House, it would be impossible to say to what extent these manufacturing establishments might increase.

SIR GEORGE LEWIS

stated, that the building was in process of construction on Mr. Dimes's land and at that gentleman's expense; and if the Vote should not be confirmed by the House, the Government, according to the arrangement made, would have to rent the building from Mr. Dimes The principal purpose of the building was to provide additional room for stores, and Mr. Dimes was willing to erect the premises at his own cost, provided an adequate rent fur them were paid by the Government. It was thought, however, that the more economical plan for the Government would be to purchase the land with the building on it. In reference to some remarks made by the hon. Member for Liskeard (Mr. B. Osborne) on a previous night, respecting the clothing for the army, he now wished to state that all the great-coats were made at Pimlico and the Government prisons; that the tunics for the infantry were divided about equally between the Pimlico establishment and the trade; and that, with respect to trousers, a large store existed when the last contract was made, but in future tenders equal numbers of tunics and trousers would be given out. Serge trousers were made exclusively at Pimlico.

First eight Resolutions agreed to.

(9.) £667,168, Barracks.

SIR GEORGE LEWIS

said, that on this Resolution he would take the opportunity of answering a question put to him by the right hon. and gallant Member for Huntingdon (General Peel) with respect to what seemed to be an excess of 3,000 men over the number voted last year. Those men were additional troops for the artillery, when that force was increased under the direction of the War Department; and the expense was to be defrayed by arrangement between the Indian Government and the War Department, so that these men did not appear among the number voted last year, nor did the charge for them really form part of the Estimates. With respect to the Vote for barracks, the House would perhaps bear in mind that in Committee of Supply a Motion was made for the reduction of the sum by £10,787, proposed as an additional charge for Sandhurst College. That Motion was affirmed by the Committee, so that the additional charge for Sandhurst was struck out of the Estimates. In consequence of that decision it became his duty to inquire how that reduction could be carried into effect, and he found the following to be the state of the case:—A Vote of £15,000 for the same service was taken last year, and a contract was entered into late in the year for nearly the whole amount, with the view of making an addition to the building at Sandhurst. The sum already expended up to the end of December was £953. The work had since proceeded, and he understood that by the end of the present quarter the contractor would be entitled to the payment on the whole of about £5,000. If, in consequence of the vote of the Committee the War Office were to give notice that the rest of the contract could not be completed, the contractor would, of course, be entitled to a compensation, probably amounting to £5,000. It would also be necessary to incur a further expense for pulling down the building (as it could not remain in its present state), and removing the materials, so that the whole expense would be about£12,000. Now, the whole Vote asked by the Government the other night only amounted to £10,787; and that being the state of the case, he thought he should not be justified unless he brought the matter again under the consideration of the House and gave it an opportunity of reviewing its decision. He therefore proposed to re-commit the Vote for the following Thursday, when he would be prepared to enter into detail. The Committee appeared to be under the impression, occasioned by an error of the press in the Estimates, that the accommodation designed for the students would be unnecessarily large; but he understood that if the addition to Sand-burst College now in progress should be completed, there would be proper accommodation for 350 students at the most, and the accommodation, after all, would be inferior to that now provided at Woolwich Academy. He certainly had not anticipated the decision of the Committee, being of opinion that the item in the Estimates was substantially only a revote. He had before stated that it was not intended to lay down any compulsory rule that all persons entering the army should enter Sandhurst College, but it appeared that the decision of the Committee was influenced by some idea that in this respect the University of Cambridge would be unjustly treated in comparison with Sandhurst College; and he was therefore desirous of reading a letter sent a short time ago from the War Office to the Vice Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, showing that there was every disposition to give a favourable consideration to the application of students from that University. The letter was dated the 29th of January, and was as follows:— I am directed by Secretary Sir George Lewis to acquaint you that, having the subject of the admission into the army and into the Royal Military College at Sandhurst of the Students of the University of Cambridge under his consideration, and having conferred thereon with his Royal Highness the General Commanding-in-Chief, he has caused letters on the subject to be addressed to the Vice Chancellors of the Oxford and Dublin Universities, copies of which are enclosed, and I am to request, in the event of the University of Cambridge being also desirous of adopting the course approved in the case of the two Universities above-named, that you will be good enough to state for Sir George Lewis's information what are the examinations at Cambridge which may be considered equivalent to the first and second examination (called Responsion and Moderation) at the University of Oxford, in order that the Secretary of State may be able to determine the qualifications which may entitle the students of the University of Cambridge to exemption from any further examination of a preliminary character in those subjects on admission to Sandhurst as military cadets. The proposal which had been made to the University of Oxford was that the preliminary examination on admission to Sandhurst should be dispensed with in the case of persons who had passed certain degrees at Oxford or Cambridge, and also that the time of admission should be lengthened by six months for the Universities. That was an arrangement which he thought would be beneficial to the students, and was likely to prove generally satisfactory. He should, in conclusion, beg to move that the Vote be recommitted on Thursday next.

GENERAL PEEL

said, that as the vote was again to come on during the following week, he should for the present content himself by referring simply to the answer which the right hon. Gentleman had given to his question with respect to the 3,000 artillery, which were represented, as hon. Members would perceive by a reference to the Estimates, as being in India, whereas they were absolutely in this country. The fact was that those Estimates provided not for 145,450 men, which was the number the right hon. Gentleman asked the House to vote that year for the army, but for 153,074, which number included the depots of the regiments in India; so that any saving in our existing expenditure would depend upon whether the latter, not the former, number was exceeded. In dealing with the point he would dismiss from consideration altogether the sum to be paid by the Indian Government as a capitation rate on regiments in India, because it had no reference to the Estimates before the House, although it might affect the Ways and Means of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. With respect to the Indian depots, however, he might observe that they were not on the Indian establishment, and never would be until they went out to that country, where they would be no addition to the establishment there, inasmuch as they would be drawn upon merely to supply vacancies; their place in England being supplied by recruits, so that no diminution of expenditure in respect to those depots would be effected. It was by desire of the Indian Government, he believed, that the strength of the depots had been reduced from 200 to 100 men for each regiment, but he doubted whether that was not a measure which would produce rather apparent than actual economy, inasmuch as a recruit after a year's training was, after all, cheaper, because likely to be more efficient, than one who had gone through his drill for only six months. Be that, however, as it might, the greatest inconvenience resulted from the way in which the men belonging to the British and Indian establishments were classified in the Estimates, and if anybody were to take those Estimates up some short time thence he would find they presented to all appearance the somewhat extraordinary information that 145,450—the number voted for the present year—cost exactly £575,750 more for pay and allowances than a greater number of men had done in the previous year. If a different arrangement were adopted, and the number of men belonging to the Indian as well as to the British establishment were more clearly defined, much confusion would, he thought, be avoided.

SIR CHARLES WOOD

said, he was afraid the change as to the Indian army was to some extent the cause of the confusion of which the right hon. and gallant. Gentleman complained. The Estimates for the year could not be presented in so clear a form as might be the case, owing to the transition state of the Indian army, consequent upon its amalgamation with the Queen's army. The fact was that as far as related to the old Queen's regiments in India no alteration had been made in the Estimates for the present year; the regiments in India being paid there, and the depôts at home being paid in this country, though in a somewhat different mode from that which had hitherto prevailed—namely, by means of a fixed capitation allowance. With respect to those regiments which had been converted from local into Queen's troops, he could only say it was perfectly impossible to give the required information concerning their depôts, inasmuch as they had not yet been formed. Before next year, however, these depots would be formed in this country, and then the capitation rate would apply to them, which was not now the case. The explanation so far as related to the artillery was somewhat different. To the old Royal artillery, which furnished men for the old batteries the capitation rate applied, but to the new local artillery, which was very much below the strength required to complete the Royal batteries—European being substituted to a great extent for native artillery—the rate was not applicable to meet the case of those new batteries of Artillery; therefore a Special arrangement had been made, which was that the whole expense of raising and recruiting them should be borne by this country. Next year they would come under the operation of the capitation rate.

MR. SELWYN

said, the Motion which the Secretary for War had submitted to the House was one which could not fail to excite considerable surprise, though he hoped the House would follow the advice rather than the example set by the right hon. Baronet, and not discuss the question. The question of the extension of Sandhurst had always been regarded as financially important, but it had now assumed a still more serious aspect, for after the statement of the Secretary for War it must be considered as affecting the rights and privileges of that House. When the Vote was discussed in Committee of Supply, he had advisedly abstained from saying anything with respect to the pledge given by the Government last Session, that the sum then voted for the extension of Sandhurst should not be expended until certain information had been laid before the House. That was a painful subject, to which he was unwilling to refer. In the remarks he was about to make he had not the slightest mention of uttering a single word which could be personally offensive either to the Secretary of War, whose courtesy everybody must acknowledge, or to his subordinate, Earl de Grey and Ripon, to whom every friend of the Volunteer movement owed many and great obligations. But the question of Sandhurst was one with respect to which a grave responsibility rested upon the Government generally. Without going into the question at length, this much might be said, that after the pledge to which he alluded was given, the Government as a body must have known that the extension of the College of Sandhurst, or any great increase of students there, was a question in which the House, or at least a large section of it, took great interest. Under those circumstances the Estimates were submitted to the House, and the right hon. Baronet made a speech in which he referred to Sandhurst and the probable increase in the number of students. He (Mr. Selwyn) then placed on the paper a notice upon the subject, and it was discussed twice—once in the House and once in Committee of Supply; and it was not till after an adverse vote on the latter occasion that the right hon. Baronet informed the House that it had come to his knowledge that the subject of debate was in fact settled and determined; that net only had the money they were called on to vote been expended, but that there was a contract involving further outlay. What, he asked, had the House been talking and dividing about? Was the discussion the other night a farce, and the division in Committee of Supply a mockery? Was the House to be told, after two discussions and after the Committee had expressed an adverse opinion, that it had come to the knowledge of the Government that it was impossible that things could remain as they were, but that it was absolutely necessary the extension of the College should be carried into effect? The existing state of things must have been known to the Government, and, as an independent Member, he had no hesitation in saying that, in this matter, the House had been trifled with by Her Majesty's Ministers. The Secretary for War had given no notice to the House of his intention of departing from the usual course, which was to ask the House to agree to the Resolution adopted in Committee of Supply; but had kept them in ignorance until the last moment, although he was bound to say that he had that afternoon privately given him (Mr. Selwyn) notice of the course which he was about to pursue. Under these circumstances he trusted that the House would not consent to the proposition of the right hon. Baronet to postpone the consideration of the subject; but that if he was prepared to take any unusual course in reference to the Vote, notice should be given in the ordinary way.

MR. SPEAKER

said, the Motion before the House was that the Vote be postponed. The next Question would be that the Vote should be taken into consideration on a subsequent day.

SIR GEORGE LEWIS

observed, that in the few remarks he had made to the House on this question, he had stated that the Government had not, in point of fact, gone beyond the Vote of last Session. He would not attempt to answer the remarks of the hon. Gentleman, but would ask the House to reserve its opinion as to whether the Government had acted with had faith or not until it would be his duty to address the House on a future day.

COLONEL KNOX

said, he would beg leave to remind the right hon. Baronet, that when his attention was called the other night to the question of Sandhurst, he stated that the Vote was only a contingent one. After that statement, which was made subsequent to a reference to the pledge given by the Government last year that the money then voted would not be used, it was naturally supposed that no steps would be taken for enlarging the College of Sandhurst until Ministers had submitted their plan of military education to the House. The fact was, however, that the whole of the new, buildings had been contracted for, that £5,000 would become due in a few days, and that the Government had made themselves responsible for the remaining £7,000.

MR. T. G. BARING

said, he must deny that any pledge was given by the Government last Session that the sum voted for the extension of Sandhurst would not be spent. What really took place last Session was this:—A discussion having arisen on the Vote in Committee of Supply, he offered, on the part of the Government, representing then as he did the War Office, that if the opposition was withdrawn, he would undertake that no money should be expended until the House should have ah opportunity of considering the question of military education; but hon. Gentlemen opposite did not agree to that proposition; a division took place, and the Vote was carried, though he admitted by a very small majority. The attention of the noble Lord the Prime Minister having been called to the alleged pledge, he (Mr. Baring) on a subsequent occasion, in answer to a statement made by the hon. Member for Windsor, distinctly stated what had occurred, and reminded the House that what he had said was, that if hon. Gentlemen did not withdraw their opposition, he was not prepared to give any pledge on the subject. On the 28th of June the discussion was renewed, and he then distinctly declined to say that the money should not be spent. In consequence, however, of that discussion, the Government re-considered the whole scheme of education at Sandhurst, and it was very much modified. The plan now proposed by the right hon. Secretary for War was quite different to that which was contemplated at the time the Vote was given.

Mr. G. W. HOPE

said, that having been the Member who brought the question before the House last Session, he might state that the majority for the Government on the division was only five; and the House knew very well that if the Government made a reasonable proposition, and told them that they should have all the information on the subject before they spent the money, they were always willing to give it credit; and he could state from information which he had obtained subsequently to the Vote, that that majority of five was entirely gained by the declaration which the Government then made. He certainly thought that the Government had pursued a very extraordinary course of conduct in subsequently repudiating the pledge that they would lay before the House all the information they possessed upon the subject; whereas up to this moment it did not possess the slightest knowledge of the scheme. He had last Session brought a Motion forward for an Address to the Crown that the money should not be expended before the information was obtained; but his late right hon. Friend the then Member for Carlisle (Sir James Graham) rose to order upon the subject; and though there was some difference of opinion on the question whether he was not in order, he bowed with deference to the Speaker's decision that he was not. They were now informed that the Government were ready to give every information upon the subject; but the House ought to have been in possession of such information long before the expenditure of the money.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, that it was quite plain from the statements of hon. Gentlemen opposite that Government had committed no breach of faith whatever in making the contract which they had made. The subject was mooted last Session in the House whether the Government had made any pledge not to proceed with the extension of Sandhurst until the matter had been further discussed. It appeared, however, not only that they had made no pledge, but it was twice distinctly stated by the organ of the Government that they had given no pledge whatever, and therefore they were bound by none. Hon. Members might, if they pleased, question the propriety of what had been done; but he could not admit that the Government were in the least degree open to the charge of having broken faith with the House, or of having followed a course which the House was led by the declarations of last Session to believe they did not mean to pursue.

COLONEL DICKSON

said, that though he had no wish to accuse the Government of a breach of good faith, it must be evident to every one that they got their Vote passed last year under false pretences. His hon. Friend the Member for Windsor had brought the matter clearly before the House; and though there might have been no exact and definite pledge given by the Government, there could be no doubt that the majority for the Government was gained in consequence of the statement that every information would be furnished before the expenditure of the money. He deprecated entirely the practice of spending money before the Government came to the House for authority to raise it; for if such a system were persisted in, no one could say to what an amount the estimates might not eventually be swelled.

MR. H. A. BRUCE

said, he was bound to say that his hon. Friend late the Under Secretary for War had correctly represented what took place on the subject of the Vote during the last Session. It was clearly then stated, on condition of the withdrawal of opposition to the Vote, that a statement of the object of the Government in proposing it would be submitted at a future time. But the opposition was not withdrawn, and therefore the pledge was inoperative. He felt quite convinced, if the scheme of the Government had been explained, the mortification or defeat they suffered the other night would not have taken place.

Ninth Resolution postponed.

Tenth Resolution agreed to.

SIR GEORGE LEWIS

said, he had then to move that Vote 14 be re-committed in Committee of Supply on the following Thursday.

MR. WALPOLE

said, he thought notice should be given by his right hon. Friend that he would, on Thursday next, move that the Vote be re-committed; then the House would have full opportunity of discussing it.

MR. SPEAKER

said, the proper form was for the right hon. Gentleman to move that Resolution No. 9, which had been postponed, be taken into consideration on Thursday next.

SIR GEORGE LEWIS moved accordingly.

MR. T. G. BARING

said, he had been able to refer to another discussion that took place last Session on the subject. The hon. Member for Windsor made a specific Motion that the sum of £15,000 should not be spent; but that Motion was declared to be not in order. On that occasion he said, what he now repeated, that there could be no charge of had faith on his part; his undertaking being, that if opposition were withdrawn, no expendi- ture would take place till the scheme of the Government was propounded. The opposition was not withdrawn, and when the hon. Member for Windsor asked him the following day, he gave no pledge on the subject; but he was perfectly ready to agree that the new system should not take effect before Midsummer, so as to give full time for the expression of opinion on the subject. He made that on the 28th of July, 1861.

MR. G. W. HOPE

said, he must admit that he had been told on the occasion referred to that it was open to him to take the opinion of the House on the Appropriation Bill; but it would have been a simple absurdity to do anything of that sort when the House consisted probably of thirty-seven immediate supporters of the Government and three or four independent Members.

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Resolution which has been postponed be taken into Consideration upon Thursday next."

The House divided:—Ayes 143; Noes 105: Majority 38.

SIR. GEORGE LEWIS

said, he proposed on Thursday to move to refer this Resolution to Committee of Supply, and there would then be one opportunity of discussion upon that Motion. If the House agreed to the Motion, there would be a further opportunity of discussion in Committee of Supply. The House would therefore see that there was no danger of its being taken by surprise. Perhaps it would be convenient now to give notice, that on going into Committee of Supply it was not his intention to propose Vote 15 that evening, inasmuch as it was more or less connected with the postponed Vote.

Forward to