[BILL. 102.] COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 12 July 1875)

§ GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR
complained that the present Bill was only a part of the defensive law of the Kingdom, that it was called a consolidating Bill, though changes were made in the laws, and that this course was opposed to the received opinions of those who were qualified to advise that we should include in a consolidating Bill amendments in the law. He also complained that the present Bill repeated clause after clause of the old Acts relating to the deputy lieutenants of counties which were not only useless, but unnecessary. This Bill was only a part of our Militia Laws, and merely related to Militia raised by voluntary enlistment, in which the duties of deputy lieutenants were in no wise concerned, and that as those services were only required in ease of raising the Militia by Ballot, it was quite useless to provide for this rank in the Bill now before the Committee. Besides, the only changes made in the law relating to deputy lieutenants were trifling and related mainly to the qualification entitling persons to be appointed to this almost useless office. It would be far better, and consistent with the opinions of those who advised on the reform of Acts of Parliament, to bring in a separate clause, amending the Acts in existence to the extent desired relating to deputy lieutenants. He would therefore move to leave out from Clause 3, page 2, down to Clause 17, page 7, inclusive, and thus leave the law relating to the deputy lieutenants to be dealt with next Session, when the House was to have the Bill relating to the Militia Ballot.

MR. GATHORNE HARDY
said, that if the Militia Laws were to be consolidated it was absolutely necessary that those clauses should appear in the Consolidated Bill, but then the old statutes from which they were taken would disappear.

§ GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR
moved, in page 3, line 27, after "Deputy Lieutenants," to insert— 1363 Provided always, That the number of Deputy Lieutenants appointed to the several counties, cities, or towns, shall not exceed the number of Lieutenancy Sub-Divisions in the respective counties, cities, or towns, of the United Kingdom. His object in moving this clause was in view to restrict the number of deputy lieutenants within some reasonable limit, for at present the number far exceeded the sub-divisions of lieutenancy into which the country was divided. It was only necessary to attach a deputy lieutenant to each of those sub-divisions, whereas there were in many counties, and perhaps in the whole Kingdom, ten times as many deputy lieutenants as there were sub-divisions, moreover, he was also desirous of seeing the Kingdom re-divided for general defensive purposes into divisions suitable for the altered state of the population. There were sub-divisions with 2,000 males and other sub-divisions with between 200,000 and 300,000, all owing to the neglect to adapt the divisions to the present time, instead of retaining the divisions of lieutenancies as they were in the beginning of the century. There was power under the existing Act to adapt the existing Militia sub-divisions of lieutenancy to those of the registration of births and marriages, and these were so wisely arranged that they were admirably adapted to the military organization of the whole country. It was only by bringing this great and efficient civil administration to bear on the Militia system that we would expect to have a great defensive force formed, on principles suited for a free country and a free people, willing and able to defend themselves and to protect their independence.

MR. GATHORNE HARDY
said, he could not agree to the proposal.

§ GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR
said, that he had the same object in view as that which the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War had—namely, to improve the Militia laws for the defence of the Kingdom, but he entirely differed from him as to the mode of carrying out that object; whilst the right hon. Gentleman abolished old laws, 1364 which had been passed at various times, as well as amended these laws, by bringing in a general Bill, under the title of a consolidating Bill. He (Sir George Balfour) was in favour of retaining those laws, because they contained provisions which former experience had proved to be wise and necessary, and which might again be needed. If changes were deemed necessary, they should first be made by an amending Bill alone; besides the old laws were, in his opinion, far more suitable than those of modern times. For instance, the laws passed in 1757, when the Militia was reformed, were excellent laws in many respects and might be revived. Again, the Local Training Act of Wyndham, and the Local Militia Act of Castlereagh, which were still in force, wholly or in part, were well adapted for the formation and training of a great defensive force, within the United Kingdom, and he therefore deprecated the abrogation of laws which contained such excellent provisions, as many of them did, being the results of actual experience, amidst the various changes in the national danger. Seeing, however, that the right hon. Gentleman was resolved to adhere to this Bill, he (Sir George Balfour) had placed many Amendments on the Paper in view to improving this meagre Bill, but as he found it would be useless for him to press the series of Amendments which he had proposed to this and succeeding clauses, he decided on allowing all to be negatived, but he must protest against the course which was being pursued, for in his opinion the right hon. Gentleman ought to send the Bill to a Select Committee, in order not only to ascertain what changes were advisable in the old laws, but to ensure a good consolidating Bill being compiled out of all the laws that had been passed relating to this great defensive Army.

§ MR. STANLEY
pointed out to the hon. and gallant Gentleman that the Bill was essentially a consolidating, and not to any important extent an amending Bill, and was intended as a step to thorough reform of the Militia Law.

§ MR. HAYTER
moved to omit the clause. He objected to it on the ground that it would place a commanding officer of small means who succeeded an officer of large means in an invidious position with respect to providing as large a number of bandsmen.

§ MR. STANLEY
, on behalf of the Government, resisted the Motion.

§ COLONEL DYOTT
moved, in page 9, to add at the end— And that no officer receiving a retired allowance for former service in the rank of Adjutant shall forfeit such allowance during the time he may serve, and is entitled to receive pay for serving in any other rank.

§ MR. STANLEY
said, the rule was that in such cases the officers would have to relinquish their retired pay, a rule to which he saw no objection.