SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES. (Hansard, 8 March 1866)

§ COLONEL H. H. FANE
asked the Secretary of State for War, whether, looking at the great difficulty now experienced in officering the Militia, and the consequent necessity of getting officers from the half-pay of the Line and distant localities, he would be prepared to allow them travelling expenses beyond the boundaries of their several counties and to their bonâ fide residences?

§ MR. PERCY WYNDHAM
asked the Secretary of State for War, if it would not, in his opinion, facilitate recruiting for the army if appointments in the Civil Service, up to the value of 25s. per week, were thrown open to those soldiers who, after eighteen years' service with good character, chose to qualify themselves for these appointments? He said, that under the Ten Years' Act Her Majesty lost the services of non-commissioned officers just at the time they were most useful. At present, non-commissioned officers who after leaving the army obtained situations gave the greatest satisfaction, and he was sure that they would be perfectly competent to discharge the duties of messengers and similar offices in the Civil Service. At present the annual sum paid to the mes- 1748 sengers in the Civil Service was £35,000 a year, and he thought that nothing would tend more to facilitate recruiting than the knowledge on the soldier's part that if he behaved himself well in the army he might obtain one of those situations when his period of service was completed. It might be said that by the adoption of the suggestion the Government would lost patronage. He did not at all wish to see the patronage in the hands of the Government diminished, but he thought that when the Government had given up the patronage of the more important offices, they might as well do the same with the smaller ones. He hoped that the matter would receive the attention of the Royal Commission about to be appointed.

§ LORD HOTHAM
said, that the subject had come under the notice of a Commission of which he was the president, and they made a distinct recommendation to the Government. He believed, if the War Office would act upon that recommendation a little more extensively, one of the present difficulties in the way of recruiting would be put an end to.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, that the subject referred to by the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Fane) had been several times under the consideration of different Secretaries of State, none of whom considered it would be advisable to make any change in the present system, because the militia force was intended to be, and it was hoped, in spite of the difficulty at present experienced in obtaining subaltern officers, would continue to be mainly a local force. He doubted whether the payment of the travelling expenses of the officers to their own residences would remove the difficulty of obtaining subaltern officers. He believed that officers on half-pay in the Line would not join the militia in any rank subordinate to that of captain. The matter had been under consideration, and it did not appear that any good result would be obtained from the payment of larger sums. In reply to the question of the other hon. and gallant Gentleman (Mr. Percy Wyndham), he had no hesitation in saying that it would be a very great advantage to recruiting for the Line if the Civil Service could be thrown open to pensioners to a greater extent than it was at present. The experiment had been tried for a short time of employing soldier clerks in the War Office, and it had proved successful. The heads of the Department spoke highly of them, and of the efficient 1749 manner in which they performed their duties. If the experiment should continue to work satisfactorily in the War Department no doubt it would be an inducement to other Departments to follow the same course.

§ COLONEL NORTH
, said he wished to ask why the amount of the Vote was smaller than last year?

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, that it was in consequence of the reduction of the force in China.

§ COLONEL NORTH
said he did not think the force in China had been reduced.

COLONEL SYKES
said, that the number of subordinate officers of Commissariat employed was not stated in the Estimates. He also wished to ask a few questions with reference to the rations, fie wanted to know if the rations were served to 133,000 men, or to a greater or less number, and whether they were served for 365 or 300 days? He also wished to know if a ration cost the same in England as in the colonies, and if this was not the case, how much it cost in India and how much in the colonies?

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, that the forces in China had not yet been reduced, but they would shortly be, as one regiment had been ordered home. In the Appendix to the Estimates a very full statement was given of all the officers in the Commissariat Department, and of the number of subordinates employed at each station. Rations were provided for the whole of the troops on the home establishment for every day in the year; and he saw that they were provided for the troops in several of the colonies in the same manner as was done at home. He could not then speak as to the practice in regard to rations in the rest of the colonies.

§ COLONEL NORTH
said, he wished to inquire what the "consolidated allowances" alluded to in one of the items consisted of?

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, they consisted of colonial allowances which were now given in a consolidated form.

CAPTAIN VIVIAN
said, he wished to call attention to the increasing charge for the conveyance of troops by railway. It amounted to upwards of £5,000 more than in the preceding year. The reason that formerly existed for moving the quarters of our troops so frequently no longer operated. Within the last twelve months there had been an unnecessary movement of troops from England to Ireland, and from Ireland to England, before the recent unhappy 1750 occurrences in the sister country. They might now keep their troops in England for two years instead of one year at particular stations, which would save much expense.

COLONEL SYKES
said, he thought the charge for the clothing of our soldiers was very high, and nearly double the cost of the clothing for the corresponding grades of the French army. Great care was taken in regard to the clothing of the French soldier, particularly as to accuracy in fitting him. He wished to refer to the clothing establishment at Pimlico, and submitted that the tailoring wages should be of less amount than they appeared to be. By means of contracts or by efficient superintendence, an endeavour ought to be made to effect a reduction in that Vote.

CAPTAIN VIVIAN
said, that in instituting a comparison between the cost of the clothing of the English and the French army they must not be misled by the French Estimates, which simply included the coatee, the trousers, and the shako. He did not think either that the quality of the material was equal to that used here. The French soldier received an allowance in respect of his other articles of dress. The Government clothing manufactory at Pimlico had been of great service, not only in supplying a better kind of cloth and better fitting clothes for the army than they had before, but also in cheapening its cost. That establishment acted as a check upon the contractors, and kept down their prices. Before it existed the contract price of the soldier's coatee was £1 1s. 10d., whereas it was now 16s. 7d. Persons who had lived upon the sale of the smaller articles of soldiers' clothing were now, he might say, "shut up." A balance-sheet for the establishment, made up according to Mr. Cobden's principle, had been prepared, and would be in the hands of Members in a few days. The War Department held that it was necessary that a civilian should manage the contracts for clothes; and when it was considered that a million of money annually passed through his hands, he ought not without very cogent reasons to be supplanted by a military officer. If the hon. and gallant Colonel were to visit the clothing establishment he would neither object to the work done nor the number of people employed at it.

COLONEL SYKES
said, 297 persons 1751 were employed in the establishment at a total cost of £474,000. The cost of the clothing was extraordinary. Several items showed how high the cost was. In the Imperial Guard the cost was not half so much, though it might be necessary to have such an establishment to test the charges of the contractors. He had always maintained, and he still urged, that it would be far better to put the majority of the work out for public competition.

CAPTAIN VIVIAN
said, the central depot could make clothing at a much cheaper rate than any contractor.

§ SIR CHARLES RUSSELL
said, that by means of the Pimlico store system they had obtained an efficient check over their supervisors, and the consequence was that they had a very good class of supervisors now. Every article was stamped, not only with the store stamp, but the number of the supervisor. The consequence was that every article, whether at home or abroad, that did not wear well, could be reported upon, so that the defaulting supervisor could be reached, and good supervisors obtained. The hon. and gallant Colonel advocated retrenchment, but he might say that they had already reduced the price of clothing enormously, and that if anything took them back to the old system, which was only upset by the Crimean War, they would get back to a system as rotten as the clothes it produced.

§ LORD ELCHO
said, he thought the clothing of our soldiers should be well made, well fitting, and of the best materials, but it was important also that those clothes should be worn in the way that would be most conducive to their health. Not unfrequently sentinels might be seen in London in the depth of winter, when the weather was coldest, without their great coats, while in summer, on the hottest days, if there happened to be a little wet, the men were muffled up in their coats. He believed the men put them on and took them off by order, and those orders were not very judiciously given.

§ MR. WHITE
said, he could not share in the admiration which had been expressed by hon. Members of the Pimlico establishment. He held it to be a reproach to Great Britain that the Government were compelled to manufacture the tunics and trousers worn by the soldiers. It might be alleged that the contractors did their work badly; but if that were true it was evidence that there was something wrong in the Department specially dealing with those matters. 1752 England exported 160 orl70 million pounds worth of manufactured goods annually; and such was the confidence manifested in the British manufacturer that goods of certain brands were carried thousands of miles away without undergoing inspection. Of course there was a reputable and a disreputable class of manufacturers, and Government officials had always been connected with the latter, the class which provided devil's dust and shoddy; consequently, goods of a worthless description had been supplied. For his own part, he looked upon the consolidation of the War and Ordnance Department which took place some years ago as a financial calamity, inasmuch as it prevented the Chancellor of the Exchequer from possessing that proper influence over the expenditure of the War Office which he exercised linden the old system. The appointment of Secretary for War as a Cabinet Minister placed that official—a man of distinguished rank—upon an equality with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and he could not now exercise proper and effective control over the War Department. As an evidence that the system indicated the weakness of the Executive they had seen how the military Estimates had swollen. Government could not make manufactured articles as cheaply or as well as private traders who were respectable persons. Government never looked into the value of its plant; never took account of the vast amount of waste; and never derived advantage from all those items, almost invisible to the Government, but which formed the profits of the private trader. He would recommend the new Members of the House instead of entering into the details of each Vote as it arose, with a view to economy, to deal with the principle involved in the system before the Speaker left the Chair, because very little good could be effected in the shape of reduction by discussions in Supply. That the Government should undertake to manufacture the various articles which they required, he regarded as a reproach to us as a manufacturing nation, for he agreed with the late Lord Lansdowne and Sir Henry Parnell, that they must of necessity be the worst agriculturists and the worst manufacturers possible. It seemed marvellous, under those circumstances, that the Government could not depend upon private firms for the supply of tunics and trousers to our soldiers. There were many known firms which could not afford to furnish a bad article because—not to speak of any higher motive—of the 1753 loss of reputation which they would in consequence suffer. He had been furnished with minute details which would support his view of the case, but he declined to enter into them on the present occasion, believing it to be better to confine himself to the question of principle. The late Mr. Cobden had stated a short time before he died that £500,000,000 sterling had been voted for the army and navy while he was in that House, without a single item having been struck off. He should therefore not trouble the Committee by asking them to divide on the present Vote, but should content himself with protesting against a system which he regarded as degrading to the national character.

LORD HENRY PERCY
said, that as general officer, he had had to inspect clothing of different descriptions, and that he felt confident that every captain under his command would tell the House that the clothing furnished by the Government was a hundred times better than that supplied by private contract.

§ SIR HARRY VERNEY
said, he wished to urge upon the Government the expediency of giving the soldier employment in the way of making articles for his own use.

§ COLONEL BARTTELOT
said, that having looked into the Vote for many years he found it to be completely under the control of the Government, because there were no means of drawing a comparison between the articles manufactured by them and those supplied by a private contractor. It would be much more satisfactory if instead of giving the cost of the tunics, and boots and shoes in a lump sum, the price of each article was furnished. The cost involved in the wear and tear of their establishment was not, he might add, included in the Vote, while it was always taken into account by private firms. He thought it would be advisable that the Government should not manufacture so much, though he was quite ready to admit that the army was now far better clothed than formerly.

§ MR. O'REILLY
said, he was afraid the Committee would be somewhat misled by the statement that in the French army the soldiers made all their own clothes except the eagles on their uniforms and their shakos. The fact was that each French regiment consisted of three battalions; and each battalion furnished a certain number of workmen who remained at the depôt, and did, no doubt, make a great proportion of the clothing. Practically, there were three small clothing establishments con- 1754 nected with each regiment. There was a rule that the men should be changed, but when the officer in charge had good workmen he was loth to part with them, and, on the other hand, these sedentary soldiers were never very effective. He was, however, a great advocate for the soldiers in minor matters doing such things themselves. The 60th Rifles were clothed by contract, and were remarkably well clothed. The prices were well known, and, therefore, it was hardly fair to say there was no test of comparison. He did not think it would be advisable to encumber the Estimates with the details of prices every year.

CAPTAIN VIVIAN
said, he was greatly surprised by the remarks of the hon. Member for Brighton (Mr. White) that the Government never could make out a balance-sheet. The balance-sheets of these clothing establishments were drawn up on a plan of the late Mr. Cobden, and if he did not know how to make out a balance-sheet, who did? Every item, including wear and tear, would he found inserted. The hon. Member said the Government were so unfortunate that they always fell into the hands of dishonest contractors, but the facts of the case were a sufficient answer to that charge. The contracts were all advertised and open to everybody, and how such startling facts as those which had been mentioned could be possible he was at a loss to know. Since the introduction of these clothing establishments the contracts were 25 per cent lower, and they were useful not only in that way but in testing the cloths sent in by contractors. He visited one of these establishments the other day and was shown two pieces of cloth, one good and the other so bad that it was impossible for it to be applied to any purpose. At the same time it looked so well; and, on being asked to select the better sample of the two, he chose the bad piece. In fact, it was so difficult to tell the one from the other that for aught he knew both the hon. Member for Brighton and himself might be clothed in "shoddy," However, if it were impossible to clothe the army without contractors, there should be an efficient supervision, for it was a well-known fact that the clothing sent out to the Crimea in a great exigency were made in Seven Dials and Whitechapel—in districts afflicted with all sorts of infectious diseases, and some of the sickness which was so fatal to our troops went out in that clothing. ["Oh, oh !"] The fact was well-known. The Trent affair showed 1755 the necessity for having the means at hand of sending out a large supply of clothing upon an emergency. The contractors now supplied 60 battalions out of 148 completely with clothing, and it was well to have the Government factory to prevent the contractors having a monopoly. It was a good thing to have these Government establishments as a nucleus; although he did not advocate everything being in the hands of the departments.

COLONEL SYKES
said, that the result of the French system was that a private's jacket in France cost 56f., or a little more than £2 instead of £3 9s., the price in England.

§ MR. CARNEGIE
said, that the system of conscription brought more skilled labourers into the ranks in France than in England; and he did not see how the plan of having all the clothing made in the regiment could be carried into effect in this country. He thought no comparison could be drawn to any purpose between the French Estimates and our own. In our army regimental tailors were always fully employed in making repairs of the men's clothing; but if the clothing were to be made by them he believed it would turn out to be of no great value.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, that it was useless to institute a comparison between our Estimates and those of the French, unless the latter were laid on the table. The French Estimates were constructed upon an entirely different principle, and he doubted whether there were more than one or two Members in the House who understood the French principle. The hon. Member for Brighton had not answered, and indeed could not answer, the fact that the contract prices of clothing had greatly decreased since the Government had introduced these clothing factories. He did not understand the hon. Member to say that all the contractors were dishonest men, but that the Government officials had a great aptness at finding out those that were dishonest; but would the hon. Member point out in what way the country would receive greater benefit from competition? At present, although the competition was quite open to everybody, one great contractor had beaten all the others out of the field. If, therefore, the Government had not these factories it would be entirely in the hands of Mr. Tait, and did the hon. Member think that would be an economical arrangement? In these particular articles, too, it should 1756 be remembered that the Government was the only consumer. No one else wanted tunics of these particular patterns, and as to guns of great size it was not to be expected that there would be any other purchasers. It would be easy, therefore, for a number of contractors to combine together and make extravagant profits on those articles; and, therefore, although the principle of competition was right, it might be carried too far. It was not correct to say that no charge on account of buildings of the Government manufactory appeared. The item was under the head "buildings and clerk of the works." If hon. Members would examine the balance-sheet to be laid on the table they would find that the cost of every item Was distinctly stated, every source of expenditure being taken into account.

MAJOR STUART KNOX
said, he had understood that certain commanding officers having complained of the clothing wrote to the clothing department on the subject but received no answer. As there were plenty of clerks at the War Office, some might be sent to the clothing establishment to answer the letters of complaint sent there by the commanding officers.

§ MR. DISRAELI
said, he did not quite understand the noble Marquess. He should have thought that where one person alone supplied an article, it would be very difficult to secure competition; whereas, he understood the noble Lord to put a case where, with a great many persons supplying an article, it would be difficult to secure competition. If the circumstances had been exactly reversed they would perhaps have brought about the conclusion the noble Lord wished the Committee to adopt.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, that what he had stated was that where there was only one consumer of the article it was very easy for a limited number of contractors to combine together and charge what they liked. He had mentioned before that only one contractor, Mr. Tait, of Limerick, supplied clothing to the War Office. This was not because there was any restriction of competition, but because, being a large contractor, he was able to supply clothing cheaper than other persons.

§ MR. DISRAELI
said, he did not think the explanation of the noble Marquess threw any light on the matter. Why should the noble Marquess assume that there was only a limited number of persons who could sup- 1757 ply the particular article? Monopoly depended upon the fact of there being only one person who could supply, and not of there being only one who could demand. The suggestion that only a limited number could supply in this case seemed to him quite gratuitous, and where only one person required and an unlimited number could supply, he should have thought the circumstances would lead to a cheap supply. The fallacy of the noble Lord was that only a limited number could supply these articles.

GENERAL PEEL
said, he understood that there was only one contractor. While he was Secretary at War the institution at Pimlico was brought into operation, and there were a great number of contractors. On two occasions of late years there had arisen two emergencies calling suddenly for a large increase of clothing, the Crimean War and the Indian Mutiny. When the War Department was remodelled it was Lord Panmure's view upon the experience of the Crimea that the army should have always in store a good stock of everything wanted. When he entered upon office £300,000 was spent upon a building to contain all the stores necessary. In the fortification scheme which Lord Palmerston proposed, a great central depot for stores was included, and up to the beginning of last year Lord Palmerston had not abandoned that idea. A moderate store of clothing ought to be kept in readiness for sudden calls, but there was no need to supply a very large reserve.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, that if the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Major Stuart Knox) would tell him privately from which regiments complaints of the clothing had been sent in he would inquire into the matter. The clothing kept at Pimlico was clothing which had accumulated in consequence of more having been provided for regiments than was required; but he was not aware that it ever had been intended to keep up a large stock of ordinary regimental clothing. He believed the clothing of the cavalry was made in the regimental workshops.

LORD NAAS
said, the Committee would recollect that it was discovered that the War Department had resolved to take on lease from the Office of Woods and Forests the whole of the Curragh of Kildare for a 1758 certain number of years. That proposal naturally created considerable alarm, and led to the waiting of a deputation, of which he was one, upon the Secretary of State, who undertook to put off all further proceedings with regard to the Curragh until the parties interested had an opportunity of expressing their opinions, and until inquiry could be made. They expected that an inquiry would be held upon the spot; but nothing of the kind took place. During the recess, in the month of November, notice was given in the local newspapers of a Bill to be brought in by the Woods and Forests, which caused the greatest consternation in the minds of those who took an interest in the subject. The proposal was to divide the Curragh into two parts, to be applied to military purposes, including those of the War Department. He wished to know whether that Department sanctioned or approved the proposed arrangement? The military authorities at the Curragh, almost to a man, were averse to the principle of the scheme, as being useless for military purposes, and as being likely to impose unnecessary trouble and expense. Furthermore, it would cast upon them increased and very onerous duties. In Ireland the project was regarded with great suspicion and dislike; it had excited a great amount of hostile feeling, and very general satisfaction would be afforded if the noble Lord were able to give an assurance that, as far as the War Department were concerned, the scheme had been definitely abandoned. To carry it out would be impossible, without the greatest infringement of public and private rights ever attempted by a public department.

§ MR. CHILDERS
said, it would be his duty in a very few days to introduce the Bill alluded to by the noble Lord, but its provisions would be very different from those which had been described. So far from tending to infringe any vested interests, the Bill aimed at discovering, by a judicial process, what rights actually existed. Commissioners would be appointed to examine all rights existing in connection with the Curragh, and from their decisions an appeal would lie to the highest court in Ireland. When the Bill was brought in the noble Lord would see that it was really an attempt to remove a scandal of the present condition of the Cuaragh, and he hoped that meanwhile the merits of that measure would not be prematurely discussed.

LORD NAAS
said, the object he had in 1759 view was to ascertain, whether in the opinion of the War Department one-half the Curragh should be set apart for public purposes? That was a perfectly legitimate question.

§ MR. COGAN
said, he could corroborate the statement of the noble Lord the Member for Cockermouth as to the feeling excited in Ireland by the threatened measure of the Government. He trusted that the noble Marquess the Secretary for War would be able to assure the Committee that the influence of a great public department like the Department of Woods and Forests would not be brought to bear unjustly and harshly against poor commoners, who would be without power of resistance. The common rights of those dwellings on the borders of the Curragh had been seriously encroached upon by the formation of the camp at the Curragh; but, recognizing the importance of the public object involved, they submitted without remonstrance to the sacrifice of some of their private rights. Now, however, it was proposed to extinguish rights which had existed for centuries, and some even that were guaranteed by charter dating from the reign of Charles.

MAJOR STUART KNOX
said, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Treasury to explain why the sum of £320 paid to the ranger of the Curragh was not given to a retired military officer instead of a civilian?

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, that so far from the condition of the Curragh being in all respects satisfactory, he was lead to believe that in many respects it required amendment.

LORD NAAS
But the military authorities at the Curragh are opposed to this particular form of amendment.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, he had heard nothing to that effect. The General commanding and the principal officer of engineers were certainly not in favour of the proposal to leave the Curragh as now existing, but he had not heard of any remonstrance from them with regard to the Bill about to be introduced. He was surprised to hear any objection made to the course taken by the authorities in the matter, for he understood that they were merely acting in conformity with the wishes expressed in that House last year. He could state that they did not intend to interfere in any way with the private rights or to confiscate any man's property. The rights of the real commoners—as distinguished from usurpers—would be preserved, and would even perhaps be rendered more valuable than 1760 ever under the proposed arrangement. With regard to the case of the ranger he had to observe that the position of that officer had formerly been a mere sinecure; but since the occupation of the Curragh by troops he had to discharge very onerous duties; and it was therefore thought proper that an addition should be made to his salary.

§ MR. M. MORRIS
said, he was anxious to direct attention to another point connected with barrack accommodation at Galway. They had already discussed and admitted the right of the military authorities to act as tradesmen; but he could not bring himself to believe that the War Department engaged with propriety in agricultural operations. Yet, what was the fact? Ten or twelve years ago, in the western province of Ireland, they acquired from a fund established for charitable purposes possession of a plot of land, with the object, as was then stated, of erecting barracks upon it. From that day to the present they had never erected any buildings of such a character on the land which they thus obtained under false pretences. On the contrary, they re-let it to an under tenant for agricultural purposes. They had even established a salmon fishery and let it to a tenant, but that was found to be illegal and was suppressed. Perhaps the next thing they did would be to lay down an oyster bed. This land had been, in fact, obtained under false pretences. Their operations had been attended with another very remarkable result. They asked the Midland Great Western Company to make a deviation from their line as originally laid down in order not to interfere with the proposed barrack accommodation; the company opposed that demand, alleging, through their secretary, that they saw no indication of any serious intention to construct a barrack; but Colonel Luard having sworn that that work was to be forthwith commenced, the company, after having appealed in self-defence to the legal tribunals, were defeated. The Board of Ordnance, backed by the public purse, opposed, unless they agreed to widen a road nearly a mile in length from the barracks into the town. The road was made at an expense of several thousand pounds, which ultimately fell on the rate-payers of the district. This had taken place in 1855, but the barracks had not yet been built; and when recently it became necessary to send troops to Galway, where for the last ten or twelve years no soldiers had been seen except on furlough, there 1761 was no fit building for their reception. The Department had no right to take land for barrack purposes and then to let it as middlemen for profit. He hoped the noble Marquess would be able to give some satisfactory explanation why, when ground for the erection of barracks had been taken so many years ago, a building which was so necessary for the safety of that part of the country, the town being filled with soldiers to enforce the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, had not yet been proceeded with.

§ COLONEL BARTTELOT
wished to know why this large sum had been lumped together? He observed that £73,000 for musketry-drill, &c, was one of the items mentioned in it. His hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Berks had called attention to the subject of musketry instruction, and pointed out its expense. He should like to ask the noble Marquess to state clearly what was the expense of this musketry instruction. It would be well if all the items connected with it were placed side by side, so that they might see what was expended on it in the army. In page 14 there were charges of £1,065 and £598 for captain-instructors of musketry and assistant-instructors of musketry, in addition to regimental pay. Then, there was this Vote, which included "musketry;" but it was impossible to say how much belonged to musketry and how much did not. On page 32 there was £1,000 charged as Allowance to officers and non-commissioned officers while under instruction at Hythe, Fleetwood, and Shoeburyness or in the regiments of the Line. Again, on page 45, there was a charge of £64,000 for "purchase of land and erecting rifle ranges, huts, &c, for 700 men." On page 68, also, there were two items of £35 under the heads of Hythe and Fleetwood, for schools. It would certainly be convenient for the Committee to have all these items under one head, in order that they might see what instruction in musketry in the army really did cost. The subject was one that ought to be seriously inquired into.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, they had tried to make the Vote as intelligible as they could, but he was not sure that the rule suggested by the hon. and gallant Member would be found at all convenient. Vote 4 contained the charges for barracks and charges paid by barrack masters. To put in that Vote charges which properly came under the Works Vote would be extremely inconvenient, and would entirely frustrate the object in view of making some 1762 one in the Department responsible for the expenditure under it. With regard to the observations of the hon. Member for Galway (Mr. Morris), he must say that he could not be responsible for the acts of the Board of Ordnance eleven years ago. The narrative of the hon. Member certainly showed that he was more careful of the interests of his constituents than his predecessors had been; but all that could be said in reply to the question raised was that inquiries should be made into the matter, and if it were found that no present intention existed to erect barracks on the ground referred to, whatever was right under those circumstances should be done. At the same time, he would remark that he had not gathered from the hon. Member's observations what he desired the War Department to do. Was it his wish that the land should be re-sold?

§ MR. M. MORRIS
said, that he did not complain of the ground having been bought, but that the barracks had not been commenced. He was of opinion that, taking into consideration the number of the people of Galway, and the size of the province of which it was the capital, barracks should be erected there on the land bought for the purpose. As matters stood, the War Department seemed to have fallen asleep over the matter.

GENERAL PEEL
said, the engineer officer had in 1855 reported against the erection of barracks at the spot. No sum of money whatever appeared to have been taken for the barracks referred to.

§ MR. M. MORRIS
said, that there should have been.

§ MR. WHALLEY
said, he wished to inquire, respecting the item of £11,682 for deodorizing and emptying cesspools, whether any uniform system had been followed by those who did the work. Would the system practised at Knightsbridge be extended to other barracks?

§ COLONEL PERCY HERBERT
said, he wished to call attention to the subject of promotions. The warrant laid down in the tenth paragraph that the primary ground for promotion should be personal merit as exhibited by zeal, ability, and general good conduct, as well as length of service. That, in his opinion, was very vague. It was not desirable that promotion in the whole Department should depend primarily upon the option of the Secretary of State for the time being. He hoped the question would be considered, and that a portion at least of the promotions would be ordered according to seniority, as was the case in other departments.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, he was not aware that the warrant read by the hon. and gallant Member was different from warrants of the same character in other branches of the service, but he knew that all departments of the War Office possessed the power to bar the promotion of an inefficient official. This was thought right on the principle that a man might be usefully employed in an inferior capacity and be deemed incompetent to fill a more important office. He would cause inquiry to be made respecting the matter referred to by the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. Whalley)

LORD HENRY PERCY
asked, whether the Government would consider the advantage to be derived by the army from making the office of Judge Advocate General permanent? Much discussion had arisen of late upon the subject of courts martial; and he was of opinion that a stop should be put to all comment on the proceedings of such courts, for discipline could not be maintained in the army if it were permitted that officers should be loaded with abuse. With respect to the appointment of Judge Advocate General, he would remark that the gentleman appointed was generally a barrister and a political adherent, not cognizant of military law and totally ignorant of military discipline. The moment he took office he had to go to school to learn his duties, and the chances were at the end of six months he would be turned out. Another would then be appointed who in his turn had to go through the same course. It was desirable that his decisions should be uniform. At present the duties were performed by the Deputy Judge Advocate. Judge Advocates should be appointed exactly in the same manner as the Judges of the land; and, as the Secretary of State for the Home Department was the mouthpiece in Parliament for the Judges of the Superior Courts, so the Secretary of State for War should be the mouthpiece of the Judge Advocate.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, that the question was one of great importance. Very possibly considerable convenience and some material advantage might arise from a change which made the office of Judge Advocate permanent and not temporary. But there were a great many reasons which made it necessary that 1764 the Government should have the assistance of a legal adviser in the House of Commons on military questions. The Judge Advocate was not the only officer in the Department. The Deputy Judge Advocate not being removable with a change of Administration, an uniformity of practice was to a certain extent secured. On the whole, he could not see that sufficient advantage would arise from making the change proposed.

LORD HENRY PERCY
said, he thought it would be better if the Judge Advocate General were not obliged to attend the House. He would be more profitably employed in the work which was now performed by a subordinate.

§ MR. SANDFORD
said, that the noble Lord who had just sat down did not appreciate duly the functions of the Judge Advocate, who was the legal adviser of the Government. He might as well propose to make the Attorney and Solicitor Generals permanent officers. It was a question, however, for the Government to determine whether the Judge Advocate should not be relieved from his quasi-judicial functions.

LORD HENRY PERCY
said, that the Admiralty was not provided with such an officer.

§ SIR CHARLES RUSSELL
said, he wished to draw attention to the Report, by Colonel Henderson, on Military Prisons in 1864, in which the erection of a prison at Aldershot was recommended. He could himself speak of the necessity of a new military prison at Aldershot. At the same time, he was very glad that the new prison had not been built. He had been told by a good authority that in the military prisons in France the practice was to utilize the whole of the prison labour. Now, any one who had gone through our military prisons must have been struck with the amount of useless labour performed. One gang of prisoners were made to carry shot and to pile it up at one end of the yard, and another gang were sent to unpile it. The Governor at Aldershot had assured him that if he were permitted to utilize the prison labour the prisoners might earn easily their entire subsistence. Shot-drill produced a kind of sulky acquiescence in an occupation which went, as nearly as possible, to turn a man into a brute. The prisoner came out a weaker, and not a stronger man; and as soon as he returned to the ranks he took the first opportunity of having a drink. The result 1765 was, that as much liquor as would have done him no harm the week before he went into prison, made him drunk, and he soon found himself in confinement again. There was a great difference in the offences committed by military prisoners as compared with civil offences, and they required a different treatment. The principal offences were drunkenness and insubordination. They ought to make an effort to carry out to a greater extent that which the military inspectors had certified to be beneficial. Suppose a military prison were to be built, he ventured to suggest that it should be capable of containing not 400 but 1,000 men, as that would comprehend nearly all their military prisoners, the average number being 1,005. At Aldershot the sewage had been applied to eighty acres, and had rendered them very fertile. He suggested that the rest of the 1,000 acres belonging to the Crown there should be similarly treated. The prisoners, besides reclaiming the land might be employed in forming gardens for the soldiers. It appeared that only eighty out of 340 prison labourers at Aldershot were usefully employed. A very high authority had objected to his suggestions on the ground that they would make prison labour an indulgence, that forced labour was never useful, and that the expense of the diet would counterbalance its advantages. He had made inquiries as to the diet, and had found that it would only be the addition of eight ounces of bread a week per man when outside the prison. It was a great reflection on this country that we should treat military prisoners with so much severity as we did.

§ MR. THOMAS CAVE
said, he had visited in 1859 the convict establishment at Kingston, in Canada, where at least 1,000 convicts were confined, and was informed that the prisoners were hired out annually by auction to the highest bidder to be employed in various kinds of labour. By this system, in addition to the whole cost of the establishment, including their maintenance, being defrayed, the Government cleared a profit of £40 a day, being 10d. a day on each prisoner. That was a proof that it was possible to employ the convicts in outdoor labour without loss to the country.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, the subject was one that deserved attention. The prison regulations for the military prisons had been recently drawn up by a committee of gentlemen who had a large practical acquaintance with the dis- 1766 cipline of prisons. The chief objection that could be offered to the scheme of the hon. Baronet was that it would render prison labour too agreeable, so that it might prove rather an indulgence than a punishment, and so lose its deterrent effect. It had been found that unproductive labour, such as shot-drill, was regarded by the convicts as far more severe and tedious than useful labour, and it was, therefore, looked upon as being a more effectual punishment. Still, he saw no reason why there should not be further inquiry into the subject, since it was difficult to understand why the punishment of military should be more severe than that of civil prisoners.

§ SIR JAMES FERGUSSON
said, he wished to call the attention of the noble Lord to the case of a very deserving class of militia officers—namely, the militia quartermasters. The War Office must be fully aware of the great advantages that had resulted from the changes which had already been introduced into this branch of the service, as while there was considerable difficulty in recruiting for the army, recruits were easily obtained for the militia, and the men were always anxious to be re-en rolled, and it was therefore a pity to permit a grievance that might easily be remedied to remain. The quartermasters of the military were chosen from among the old non-commissioned officers of the regular army, and on their appointment to a militia regiment they received altogether, including their pension of 2s. a day, the sum of 7s. a day, while they ranked with junior lieutenants. But when the regiment to which they were attached was disembodied, their pay, unless they had been embodied for ten years, was suddenly cut down to the 2s. a day they derived from their pensions as non-commissioned officers. That was a great hardship upon men who had been accustomed for years to means which enabled them to live in comparative comfort, and who had occupied a gentlemanly position. It was not creditable to the country that a man who was incapacitated at sixty years of age should be sent adrift with such an allowance as could not support him. One quartermaster was subject to epileptic fits, and on retiring was only given the allowance of a non-commissioned officer. He did not desire an immediate 1767 answer from the noble Lord, but he put it to him whether it would not be possible at a small cost to provide the militia quartermasters with a retiring allowance?

§ MR. O'REILLY
said, he begged to supplement the statement of the hon. Baronet by observing that the only pension a militia quartermaster could get was 3s. a day, and that he could only obtain after ten years' uninterrupted service in an embodied regiment. The cost to the country would be but small if a retiring pension were given them on easier terms. There were also two petty economies practised with regard to these men which were unworthy of the country, while they involved great hardship to the men. In the first place, though all quartermasters in the army were entitled to 6s. 6d. a day, the militia quartermasters when—on their regiments being disembodied—they were retained in the service for other duties, were mulcted of 1s. 6d. a day, while their work was harder. There was another petty and worthless economy which was practised towards them. The lodging allowance, or, as it was now called, the commuted lodging allowance—for lodging, fuel, and lights—was 14s. a week when the regiment was embodied and barrack accommodation for them was not to be had. When the regiment was disembodied this allowance was cut down to 8s. a week, a proceeding injurious to the quartermasters and not worthy of the country. It might be said that 5s. a day was quite sufficient when the regiment was disembodied, because then they had less work; but the fact was, they had far more work, for they had to keep the whole of the stores in order, and also the stores of the Volunteers, without the assistance which they would have when the regiment was embodied. The matter was inquired into before the Royal Commission on the Militia but not redressed, though General Doyle had stated before it that the case required consideration.

MAJOR STUART KNOX
said, he hoped that if militia, whether English or Irish, were to be quartered in Ireland, they would not be billeted, but placed in barracks, as in the former case they would be exposed to great temptation from the Fenians and others.

COLONEL GILPIN
said, he thought 5s. a day was fair remuneration for quartermasters when the regiment was disembodied, for he could not agree with the hon. Gentleman opposite that they had then more to do. But he thought after a 1768 certain period of service, when they had got too old to be useful as quartermasters, it was rather hard that they should have to fall back on the small pensions they had earned when non-commissioned officers of the Line. They were a deserving body of men, and a small addition to their pension, of say 2s. 6d. a week, would be very acceptable.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, that where there were barracks the authorities invariably took care the militia should be quartered in them, and where soldiers were in possession that the barracks should be vacant at a convenient time when the militia were in training. But there were some places where there were no barracks. With regard to the quartermasters, it was quite possible that the terms upon which they obtained a retiring allowance might be taken into consideration. But the Royal Commission on Militia, which had made inquiries into the case, had issued no recommendations in their favour. He could not agree with the hon. and gallant Officer who thought that 5s. a day was not an adequate remuneration when the regiment was disembodied. The quartermasters were invariably drawn, as they ought to be, from the non-commissioned officers.

COLONEL SYKES
said, he wished to ask for an explanation for the increase of the Vote for the clothing of the Militia from £115,000 last year to £175,514 this year, though the number of men was about the same in both years.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, the clothes of the Militia regiments lasted generally five years; several regiments were embodied five years ago, which rendered it necessary now that they should be supplied with fresh clothing.

§ MR. BARNETT
said, he wished to inquire whether it was contemplated to supply the Yeomanry Cavalry generally with an improved modern pattern of carbines. He understood that several regiments were so supplied while others were not. He was aware that to a great extent the cavalry soldier was chiefly dependent on his sword, and that there was not time when the Yeomanry Cavalry were called out to do much more than practice that weapon. Inasmuch, however, as they were often employed for skirmishing duty, it might be worth while to give them a more efficient weapon 1769 than the old carbine. He reminded the noble Marquess that as there were now butts almost all over the country, supplying the cavalry with improved carbines might induce the Yeomanry Cavalry to enter into frendly competition with their fellow volunteers, and thus while it would promote cordiality of feeling it would at the same time familiarize them with the use of their weapons.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, that some Yeomanry regiments were already armed with rifle carbines; but he was not aware that the stock was sufficient to arm the whole force. He rather thought it was not; but as the cavalry were by degrees armed with breech-loaders there would be a sufficient number of rifle carbines available for arming the Yeomanry Cavalry.

§ MR. SANDFORD
said, that he was requested by the officers of the several corps of Volunteer Engineers to call the attention of the House to the fact that while the Volunteer Engineers only received the same capitation grant as the members of the other branches of the Volunteer service, their expenses were far heavier. This he considered a real grievance. They had to pay for land hired for the purposes of engineering drill, for the material required for gabions and bastions, for the transport of materials for engineering works, and for additional store accommodation. In addition to these items, when any stores supplied by Government were lost the Engineer officers had to defray the expense; and, they were compelled to wear a scarlet uniform, which was very expensive. They asked from the Government an additional grant of £1 a head per annum, and as the entire number of Volunteer Engineers was 2,500 the increase would entail an additional expense to the country of only £2,500 a year. It might be said that the present was not the time to in crease the amount of the Estimates. In answer to that objection, he would call the attention of the House to the fact that several Yeomanry corps to which grants would be voted would not be called out for active service during the present year. He thought that a portion of the surplus fund thus obtained ought to be given to that most deserving branch of the Volunteer body, the Engineers.

COLONEL GILPIN
said, he wished to bring under the notice of the House the 1770 case of the inspectors of Volunteers, whom he thought were inadequately paid. The pay of the adjutant of a Volunteer regiment was 10s. a day; while the inspector, who held the rank of captain, only got 9s. 6d. a day. The adjutant might have more continuous work, but the inspector, besides being of higher rank, had far more responsibility, and had to see that the adjutant and the other officers did their duty properly. The assistant-quartermaster-general, who was only the equal in rank of the inspector, received 14s. 3d. a day, and he hoped the Government would take into consideration the propriety of increasing the salary of the inspectors.

§ COLONEL EDWARDS
said, he quite agreed with the hon. Member for Maldon, that as £6,000 could be dispensed with in the Vote for the Yeomanry for this year, in consequence of the prevalence of the rinderpest in many counties, that sum could not be better disposed of than upon the Engineer Volunteers, whose expenses were necessarily much heavier than other Volunteer corps. He could bear testimony to the efficient services that the Artillery Volunteers were prepared to render, in the event of their being called out, in defence of their Queen and country.

§ COLONEL NORTH
said, he did not mean to say that the adjutants were overpaid, but there could be no doubt that the inspectors were underpaid. They ranked as field-officers and received only 9s. 6d. a day, and the travelling expenses allowed to them were notoriously inadequate. The Volunteer inspector was compelled to attend at Volunteer drill meetings, and in the towns where these were held, during their duration, it being considered a gala time, lodgings were exceedingly expensive, sometimes as much as a couple of guineas having to be paid for a bed.

§ MR. SCLATER-BOOTH
said, he thought it unusual, when the House was in Committee of Supply on the Army Estimates, to have Gentlemen propose that the pay of a certain class of officers should be increased. Complaints had been made of the Army Estimates not being lower than they now were, and the present was not the time to increase the salaries of any class of officers. The post of inspector of Volunteers was an excellent staff appointment. The inspectors of Volunteers were, no doubt, a very valuable body of men, but it was an appointment that officers in the army were glad to obtain. The pay was of very little importance in comparison 1771 with the comfortable appointments they obtained.

§ LORD ELCHO
said, that with reference to the question of the increased pay of the inspectors there could be no doubt that they were posts which were very much sought after by the officers of the army. It was satisfactory to know that although there was an increase this year in this Vote it was not in the staff, but in the effective of the force. The increase of £1,200 in the capitation grant represented that so many more men had this year joined the force, or that the men in the force had earned the extra 10s. grant, and by that amount the corps was consequently increased in numbers and efficiency. This showed the force to be in a healthy state. There was a part of the force which cost the country nothing, and did not appear in the Estimates, and to which his noble Friend did not allude when moving the Estimates, but of which some mention ought to be made, and that was the Volunteer Railway Staff Corps, which Colonel M'Murdo (the late Inspector General of Volunteers) had established, and which had been attended with admirable results. Hon. Members might have seen gentlemen wearing a sort of staff uniform attending levees. They were volunteer colonels by title and rank, but occupied the position of traffic managers of the different railways throughout the country. When it was known that they were colonels without regiments, having no men to command, there would be, no doubt, an inclination to smile, and he confessed that he had had on former occasions that tendency. But it had come to his knowledge through Colonel M'Murdo, that they were a very useful body of men, and that they had organized the means of transit in case of invasion or war of a large body of men and material from one part of the kingdom to another in a very short space of time. He understood that by their organization they would be able to place within thirty hours on any given point within a certain distance of the metropolis 150,000 men, 60,000 horse, and upwards of 100 guns, and that within twenty-four hours they could collect 80,000 navvies for the purpose of throwing up entrenchments. It was satisfactory to know that that could be done, and that we could feel that a great strength was added to the force of the country by the organization of such a corps.

CAPTAIN VIVIAN
said, this Vote represented the cheapest and most efficient 1772 army in the world. We had an army of 150,000 men, for which we paid £348,100 only. The army for which we paid this trifling amount was nearly as large and as efficient as that which cost £15,000,000 annually. They had been spoken of in high terms by commanding officers at reviews, and the late Lord Clyde had said that he would as soon take 50,000 Volunteers into the field as any troops he had ever fought with in the world—the only difficulty he could have with them would be in restraining them. It was highly satisfactory to hear the statement that had been made by the noble Lord (Lord Elcho) with reference to the Volunteer Railway Staff Corps. He hoped what was asked for would be given to the Volunteer Engineers.

§ COLONEL H. H. FANE
said, it was a curious fact, with reference to the capitation grant, that the more successful it had been the more anomalous had been its effect upon the regiments. Before the capitation grant was established the regiments were very much supported by honorary members, but when the capitation grant came into operation the effect was that nearly all the honorary members ceased subscribing, and a falling off in the revenue of the regiments had consequently taken place. The pressure that had been put on the entrance fee in various regiments had also had to be dropped, and in many the annual subscriptions had had to be reduced, and the consequence was that they had very little private income whatever. The items on which the capitation grant was expended were restricted to very few, and they were rather embarrassing to commanding officers when they had other expenses of great importance to meet. A very important item was that for the regimental bands. It was said that they were merely a source of amusement; but if the bands were reduced the men would neither come to drill nor march out. The Volunteers felt that at the end of the year, when they had earned their capitation grant, they ought to be at liberty to spend it as they liked. The grant could be credited to the funds of the regiment, the commanding officer would then spend it through his finance committee, and thus a great deal of disagreeable red tape would be done away with, and the advantage of the various corps at the same time promoted.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, it might seem perfectly reasonable that these corps having earned the capitation grant should be permitted to spend it 1773 in the way they thought most conducive to their interests; but the restrictions imposed upon its expenditure were founded on the recommendation of a Royal Commission. It was true that the grant would have been earned, and that the country would not have to pay it again. At the same time, it was quite conceivable that if the grant were wasted the corps might suffer prejudice. With regard to the Inspectors of Volunteers, there was no difficulty experienced in obtaining fit officers of that class for the present scale of pay and allowances; and those officers were perfectly aware of what their emoluments would be when they accepted their appointments. He admitted that the deputation of Engineer Volunteers who went to the War Office the other day made out a tolerably good case for an increase in the amount of the capitation grant paid to their corps; but he was not sure that they had heard the case of all the other corps in that matter. He did not understand that the capitation grant covered the actual expense of any Volunteer corps; and under the existing regulations the claim put forward on behalf of the Volunteer Engineers could not be acceded to.

COLONEL SYKES
said, he wished for information as to the amount of £232,476 for gun factories, and as to the number and size of guns that were to be turned out of the Royal Factory this year. In the French Estimates the quantities of metal, &c, were given, and the number of guns that were to be made from those quantities. Such information as that was very desirable. At present they had not the means of knowing what the guns to be manufactured would cost.

GENERAL PEEL
said, he wished to ask, how the sum of £172,974 taken for the Royal small arms factory was to be spent—whether in the manufacture of new arms or in the conversion of the Enfield rifles into breech-loaders?

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, that only a lump sum had been taken for the small arms factory, for the very reason that they did not yet know how that sum would be expended. If they should be so fortunate as to be able to decide on the matter of the new breechloader before the conclusion of the next 1774 financial year, they would expend as much as they could in the manufacture of that arm; but at present he thought the greater part of the Vote would be expended in the conversion of the Enfield rifle to the Snider pattern. It would probably be necessary to manufacture a certain number of small arms of some kind, and possibly they would be breech-loaders. With regard to the Question put by the hon. and gallant Member for Aberdeen (Colonel Sykes), there would not really be much use in placing in the Estimate the information he desired. It was all given in the balance-sheet, which would be laid on the table in a few days, and which would show in what way the money voted in previous years had been expended. They could tell the hon. and gallant Member what guns they proposed to make in the ensuing year, but he would not be able to check the sums from that, because a large portion of the money taken for the gun factory was spent upon the repairs of guns and gun-carriages.

GENERAL PEEL
said, he wished to inquire how much of that Vote would be spent for the navy?

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, he did not know. He could not recollect that in any of the Estimates which he had seen any distinction was made as to the portion of the sum that was taken for the navy. If the right hon. Gentleman had given him notice he would have supplied him with the information.

§ COLONEL BARTTELOT
said, the country would not be satisfied with the information given as to the manufacture of small arms. He took a very great interest in the small arms factory, and was most anxious to know with what weapon our soldiers were to be armed. The Government had lately tried one pattern, the Enfield, that had signally failed, and now they were about to try another, the Snider, but what guarantee had they that it would answer any better than those that went before? A breech-loading rifle had been adopted by the army of a powerful nation on the Continent. [The Marquess of HARTINGTON: What army?] The Prussian. Such rifles were used in the late war by the soldiers of Prussia, and he believed they had them before that period, while England, the richest nation in the world, in the 19th century, was without a breech-loading rifle for her troops. It might be true that the best kind of rifle had not yet been found out, but one had been invented which was much better than 1775 that now supplied to the soldiers. This was a matter of great importance, and the Vote ought not to be agreed to without more information from the noble Marquess.

CAPTAIN VIVIAN
said, he wished to ask what were the duties of the superintendent of the machinery?

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, the item of machinery, although it appeared for the first time in the Estimates for the present year, was not a new item. Mr. Anderson, who was formerly assistant-superintendent of the gun manufactory, combined with that appointment the superintendence of the machinery, but now he had nothing to do with the guns, and devoted the whole of his attention to the machinery. He was a professional engineer and well qualified to enter into the details of machinery. The Prussian was the only nation he had ever heard of using a breech-loading rifle. This was well known to the War Department; but they would rather preserve the arms they had than have such a clumsy, awkward heavy weapon as the Prussian breech-loading rifle was deemed to be. The French and English Governments began to consider the subject at the same time, but the French had made no more progress than we had. It was a very difficult question; but he thought the experiments which had been going on during the last year would turn out not to have been altogether in vain.

MR. CORRY
said, he should like to know what were the intentions of the War Office respecting those ships built on the broadside and those on the turret principle, which were to be furnished with 600-pounder guns?

§ LORD ELCHO
said, that he had on a former occasion called the attention of the House to the subject of the manufacture of small arms. A Committee was appointed to decide between the several systems of rifling, and two years ago they recommended the adoption of a particular principle; but instead of attending to that recommendation, the War Office had gone on for the last two years steadily ignoring the recommendations of their own Select Committee. A Vote was passed annually for the manufacture of arms which had been condemned by that Committee. He protested against the argument of the noble Lord, that because other nations had not got a breech-loading rifle we were justified in remaining in our present position. Prussia had for the last twenty years been armed with breech-loaders, and 1776 how could we expect to get a good one when the inducement to our gunmakers was only £70, whilst a small country like Switzerland offered £800. So long as the present system was in force it was not surprising that the gunmakers did not come forward with improvements in the manufacture of breech-loaders. He wished to give notice that to-morrow he should ask whether the noble Lord had any objection to lay on the table any correspondence which had taken place between the War Office and the gunmakers, assigning their reasons for not having accepted the competition into which they were asked to enter by the Government.

§ COLONEL EDWARDS
said, that during the last fifty years the weapon employed by the Prussian army was the needle-gun, which at one time was highly estimated by the military authorities. Latterly, however, it had become unsuitable for the requirements of the field. He believed, that if Her Majesty's Government would offer a sufficient reward for the best breechloader, the gunmakers of England would produce a weapon quite superior to anything yet accomplished.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, that his noble Friend (Lord Elcho) was not quite correct in his remarks concerning small arms. The War Office had obtained a good pattern, and the money that had been expended upon it, he thought, had not been thrown away. The sum of £70 which had been offered to the gunmakers was not tendered as a reward, but for defraying the expense of preparing rifles for competition. The Government were prepared either to give a reward to any person who invented a satisfactory weapon, or else to employ him to a considerable extent in manufacturing rifles for the army. No doubt the sum of £70 was not sufficient to cover the expense to which a maker was put in preparing a specimen, and a larger sum would, therefore, be offered in the next competition. Every one knew that the Woolwich gun combined the system of Sir William Armstrong with a modification of the French system of rifling, to which Colonel Palliser had contributed more than any one else, and that officer had not made any complaint, nor expressed any dissatisfaction. He really did not know who were the inventors whose brains had been picked and whose inventions had been stolen. There were six 600-pounder guns included in the Estimate. One gun had been used in many experiments at Shoebury- 1777 ness, and it had received some damage, but improvements had been introduced since it was made.

§ LORD ELCHO
said, his point with reference to the manufacture of these small arms was, that since the Committee reported some years ago the War Office had manufactured over 100 stands of an arm which was inferior to that recommended, although the requisite alteration in the machinery could have been made at the expense of a few shillings.

§ SIR MATTHEW RIDLEY
said, he wished to ask for an explanation of the item of £5,500 for "Hire of horses, Woolwich, for the Removal of Stores," He thought it very large.

§ MR. OLIPHANT
desired to call attention to grievances complained of by the officers of the Military Store Department, in which there was a stagnation without parallel—indeed it seemed to proceed on an inversion of the ordinary principle, so that the longer men had been in the service the lower seemed to be their rank, There was no one among the colonels who had served so long as the lieutenant-colonels, nor of the lieutenant-colonels so long as the majors, nor they so long as the captains, while the lieutenants had served longest of all. There was one officer who, at the average rate of promotion, would have to serve actively seventy-three years and reach the age of 110 before he could attain a higher rank. There were anomalies in pay as well as in promotion, and a man who once had £500 a year had steadily risen until his income now was £300 a year. Under such an extraordinary state of things, there could be no wonder that there were great complaints in all the ranks of that service with the exception of the upper rank. The Department contrasted most unfavourably in these respects with the Commissariat Department, and he was sure that an improvement would promote a better feeling than now existed, and would be attended with advantageous results. He gave notice that he should move for the following Returns:—Of the names of the officers of the Military Store Department; departmental grade; relative rank; length of service, distinguishing the periods served in each grade, including the time passed 1778 in a clerical capacity; nature of duties at present assigned; pay; amount of charge pay in those cases where an officer was in charge of a station; approximate value of stores under the officer's charge; the period which had elapsed since last promotion; rate of amount of retiring pay.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, he could not give to the hon. Baronet opposite (Sir Matthew Ridley) a detailed explanation of the item for the removal of stores, but it did not strike him as being excessive, for stores were being constantly landed and shipped at Woolwich, and, in fact, there was a movement going on amongst them during the whole day long. With regard to the Military Store Department, which was a most important one, and the officers of which were most meritorious and hard-working men, he supposed the remedy for the grievances complained of would be the assimilation of the Store Department and Commissariat Department; but such a proposition would involve, not a reduction of the Estimates, but a very considerable increase of them. The Commissariat Department was organized with higher grades of officers simply because the duties were considered by those who organized the Departments to be more responsible. If there bad been any considerable stagnation of promotion in the Store Department, it was owing to the fact that the re-organization in 1859 and 1861 placed a great many young men at the top of the service, and a number of old men at the bottom of it. The hardships resulting from these arrangements would be gradually remedied, but it was impossible to obviate them, In former times when a gentleman was appointed storekeeper he had little prospect of promotion; but now, although promotion was not rapid, the prospect of it was supplemented by other substantial advantages. He could not understand the case of a gentleman whose income had fallen from £500 to £300 a year, unless he had at some time received extra pay for the performance of extra duty.

§ SIR MATTHEW RIDLEY
said, the answer to his question was not quite satisfactory. He had come to the conclusion that the item of £5,500 for the conveyance of guns was an unreasonable one, considering the really admirable way in which the surface of the road over which the guns were conveyed was kept, and its great hardness. The noble Lord suggested that it was possible he might not have been at Wool- 1779 wich, but although a civilian he had been to the arsenal there, and had come to the conclusion that the item of £5,500 for horse hire for the removal of stores was unreasonable in amount. He thought the military horses might be used and thus the country be saved expense. He did not wish to divide the Committee on the subject—it was not his habit to do so—but he desired to have a more satisfactory answer. He had no desire to obstruct the Government in getting the necessary supplies for the service of the country, but he did think the Government authorities should give the Committee some further explanation upon that point. If he did not receive a satisfactory answer he should be obliged to divide the Committee.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, he must express his regret that he could not give the hon. Baronet a more satisfactory answer, but he did not know in what way he could do it. He really did not know what horses were employed.

§ SIR MATTHEW RIDLEY
said, he would be satisfied if the noble Lord would reserve the Vote for a future occasion or give the information on the bringing up of the Report.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON
said, if he could get the necessary information for the hon. Baronet in time he would give it with the Report. He did not propose to take any other Vote on the Army Estimates that night.

MR. CORRY
said, he wished to ask the Secretary for the Admiralty, what was the latest hour at which he proposed to proceed with the Navy Estimates to-morrow night.

§ LORD CLARENCE PAGET
said, he could not exactly say. The only Vote which was likely to lead to discussion he proposed to defer to the next occasion.