MILITIA ESTIMATES.—RESOLUTIONS. (Hansard, 9 February 1863)

SIR GEORGE LEWIS
said, that as the Resolution of which he had given notice might be considered to involve a change in the constitutional practice in regard to moving the Estimates for the Disembodied Militia, a few words of explanation as to the origin of the practice might be necessary. The Militia Estimates had become a matter of routine and usually passed with little general observation, but there was a time when the militia was connected with the most stimulating Parliamentary contests. It was the assumption of the management of the militia by the Long Parliament that caused the civil war between Charles I. and his subjects. After the Restoration an Act of Parliament was passed which vested the government of the militia in the Crown, and therefore that constitutional question was set at rest. At the same time the charge of the militia was imposed upon persons of property in the counties, under the control of the lords-lieutenant and deputy-lieutenants. The expense of the militia was, in fact, defrayed out of the county rate, and became a matter not only of local management but of local charge. About the end of the reignof George II., in 1757, an Act was passed by which, while the management of the militia was substantially left unchanged, the expense was transferred to the general taxation of the country, and became the subject of votes of the House of Commons. The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, under that Act, on the certificate of the lords-lieutenant of counties, made an order for the amount required upon the Receiver of Land Tax. By that change the militia became, as far as payment was concerned, virtually upon the same footing as the King's army—the regular army of the country; but the Militia Estimates were not, concurrently with that change, prepared in the same mode as the regular Army Estimates. He presumed, from a desire to retain on the part of the popular branch of the Legislature, some portion of that hold on the militia which had existed when the militia was a purely local charge, the preparation of the Militia Estimates was placed under 199 the control of that House, and annually a Motion was made for the appointment of a Select Committee to prepare them. That system was introduced soon after the passing of the Act of 1757, and had continued, he believed without any alteration, up to the present day. When that peculiar mode of preparing the Militia Estimates was introduced, the Estimates were substantially prepared by the Select Committees of that House; but at what period the change, which afterwards took place, occurred, he was unable to say. However, since he had been a Member of that House, and he apprehended from a date much earlier, it had been the practice for the executive Government to prepare the Militia Estimates, and they were submitted, ready prepared, to the Select Committee. That Committee generally assented to them with little or no investigation. The appointment of the Committee, in fact, had become little better than a matter of form, for substantially the Committee no longer exercised any power. During the last Session, indeed, the appointment of the Committee gave rise to misunderstanding, and some hon. Members of that House thought that the Government were taking an unusual course in referring the matter to a Select Committee, and a discussion thereon arose. He had, consequently, stated, in the course of last Session, that if the change was likely to meet with the general approbation of the House, he should propose that the Militia Estimates should be put on the same footing as the other Army Estimates, and that the whole should be presented simultaneously to the House by the Government. He would state what was the practice with respect to other branches of expense similar to the militia. The Estimate for the Yeomanry was included in the ordinary Army Estimates. The same was the case with respect to the Volunteers. The Estimate for the embodied militia was likewise included in the Army Estimates. The distinction was between the embodied and disembodied militia, and the Resolution he proposed referred exclusively to the disembodied militia. The annual Vote for the Jersey and Guernsey militia was also included in the general Army Estimates. For the purpose of the Appropriation Act the Vote for the militia was likewise comprehended under the same category as the general vote for the army, and the sum was included in the Army Accounts. If any valid 200 objection could be urged to the Resolution he now proposed, he should have no desire to press his Motion on the House. He believed, however, that in reference to the mode of presenting the expense of the armed force of the country, it would be found more convenient than the existing mode, that the whole of the charges should be under the consideration of Parliament simultaneously. At present, the charge for the disembodied militia, which last year amounted to £750,000, was presented apart from the other Military Estimates, and was considered at the end of the Session—an arrangement less convenient for discussion, and involving, as it seemed to him, less responsibility to the executive Government, than if it were included in the general Estimates for the army. He, therefore, hoped that the House would agree to the first Resolution he had to propose. He had placed two Resolutions on the notice paper, in order that the House might understand the course of proceeding he intended to take; but that night he should only move the first Resolution, postponing until after the report of the first the second Resolution for an Address to the Crown, praying that Estimates of the charge for the disembodied militia might be prepared and laid before the House. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving a Resolution— That in the opinion of this House, it is expedient to discontinue the practice of appointing a Select Committee to prepare Estimates of the charge of the Disembodied Militia of Great Britain and Ireland; and that such Estimates be in future prepared on the responsibility of Ministers of the Crown.

COLONEL DUNNE
said, that the objection to the Resolution was, that it transferred to the Crown the old constitutional power possessed by that House, and converted the militia into a part of the Standing Army. A militia force was adopted at an early period of our history, on the abolition of the old feudal system of knights' fees, established by William the Conqueror. As early as the time of Henry VIII., if not earlier, our kings issued warrants to lords-lieutenant, as they named them, and sent them to different counties, where they raised troops; and that practice continued down to the time of Charles I., and in accordance with this practice he issued such warrants to certain noblemen, whom he constituted lords-lieutenant, and assumed to himself the power of raising the militia force, 201 which was opposed by the Long Parliament and wrested from him. After the Restoration, in the 13th, 14th, and 15th years of Charles II., Acts of Parliament reinvested the management of the militia in the Crown, but the cost was defrayed by the counties out of the county rates. That system continued till the 42nd of George II., when the cost was transferred to the Consolidated Fund, but the House retained the power of preparing the Estimate. The Estimate was not made at the pleasure of the Crown; it did not depend on any regulation of the Minister of War. Practically the Estimates had been prepared by the Government officials, and laid before the Select Committee, and it would appear to have been for some time so far a formality, because the Committee rarely exercised the power it possessed of revising the Estimate presented, though that power enabled it not only to diminish, but increase the amount if it thought fit. But within the last ten years he had known those Estimates discussed and divisions take place in Committee on the details. He believed that such discussions were not convenient to the Crown; and this, he supposed, was the reason for getting rid of them. But by agreeing to these Resolutions the House would be giving up a constitutional principle. He could see no inconvenience in the Committee; and if the Committee did their duties, they could make alterations in the Estimates and submit them to the House, which could not be done in other military Estimates. However, he did not now mean to offer any serious objection to the Resolution; but he thought the House had had very short notice of so important a change on a constitutional question as that contemplated, and he trusted, that if the House were disposed to pass the Resolution that night, the right hon. Baronet would give them time for its full consideration.

COLONEL GILPIN
said, that though it was true the Militia Estimates were prepared by the War Minister, yet for a long series of years it had been the custom of the House to take the initiative on those Estimates, and in the Select Committee opportunity was afforded for their consideration and, if necessary, for their alteration. If once the Militia Estimates were assimilated to the other Army Estimates, he should like to know what chance there would be of effecting any alteration in them. But whether the new system was adopted or the old continued, he only 202 hoped that care would be taken to obtain value for the money expended.

SIR GEORGE LEWIS
said, that there was no intention on the part of the Government, or on his own part, to make the smallest alteration in the system of managing the militia, nor to propose any alteration in the existing Acts by which they were governed. No change would be made, except in the mode of bringing the Estimates under the consideration of the House. He believed that the mode he proposed would be found most convenient and acceptable to a majority of Members, and there was no other reason for maintaining the present system than its antiquity and its existence. Under the proposed system the Estimates must come before the House in Committee of Supply, and any alteration could then be made.

SIR HENRY WILLOUGEBY
said, that his experience did not lead him to pay much respect to Estimates, and the evidence taken by the Committee on Public Accounts clearly showed that Estimates were scarcely any guide to expenditure. He did not see the value of the change proposed. Practically the Militia Estimates were prepared by the Government, and were allowed by the House; but in the Committee Gentlemen holding high rank could express their opinions with much more ease and familiarity than they could in the House; and he did not see the advantage of giving up any possible check upon the Government which the sitting of the Committee afforded. The House would always look with jealousy upon financial power as affecting the militia. There was another question which he hoped the right hon. Gentleman had considered, and that was the omission of the details of militia expenditure from the published accounts. The House was aware that the expenditure of the army was published in detail after it had been incurred; and although it was true they did not get the accounts until some time after the expenditure, still the detailed account was the only document which showed how vast millions were expended. But in the Militia Accounts No. 4 was a blank page. If it were not intended to make an alteration, he would bring the matter under the consideration of the House. As matters stood the large sums voted for the militia were practically not explained in the usual form. The matter was noticed by the Committee on Public Accounts in one of their Reports, and the 203 defect he complained of ought to be corrected by the Government giving the militia expenditure in detail in the same manner as the army expenditure was given.

SIR GEORGE LEWIS
said, that the present practice was to present a detailed account in respect of the embodied militia, and it was included in the annual army account; but in respect of the disembodied militia the expense was given annually in a total sum, but without details. All the money, however, was spent under the administration of the War Office, and ample materials existed there for a detailed account. He should be happy to give the details to any extent that might be desired by the House.

GENERAL PEEL
said, he considered that it would be of great advantage to have the Militia Estimates submitted to the House along with the Army Estimates, so that hon. Members could see at one glance what was to be the whole military expenditure for the year. If that were the object of the right hon. Gentleman's Resolution, he would be willing to accept it. Hitherto they had only learned incidentally what were the expenses of the disembodied militia when the Chancellor of the Exchequer made his annual statement. If, however, there were any advantage in having the Estimates submitted to a Committee, there was no reason why that advantage should not be continued, as it might be if the Committee were to sit at an earlier period of the Session.

COLONEL DICKSON
said, that after what had been said by the right hon. Baronet (Sir Henry Willoughby) and by the right hon. Gentleman below him (General Peel), and after the almost vain attempts made to reduce the expenditure last year, a little time ought to be allowed to them to consider what effect the right hon. Baronet's Resolution would probably have. They had had short notice of the Resolution.

SIR GEORGE LEWIS
I gave notice of it on the first night of the Session.

COLONEL DICKSON
said, that the notice was certainly short, and hon. Members might not have paid attention to it on the first night of the Session. He hoped they might have time to consider the matter before the Resolution was pressed, especially as some officers had said, that if the House were divided, they would vote against the Motion.

SIR GEORGE LEWIS
said, that he could not have given longer notice unless 204 he had brought the matter forward last Session; and if he postponed it, it would be for another year, inasmuch as it would be impossible to frame the current Estimates upon a Resolution so postponed.