HC Deb 04 August 1888 vol 329 cc1562-89

SUPPLY—considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

(1). £652,000, Transport and Remounts.

SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT (Sussex, N.W.)

said, he was quite sure it was the wish of all those who took an interest in these Votes that they should not, at that time of the Session, discuss them at any length. Therefore, he would content himself with making as brief a statement as he possibly could. He saw his hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the War Department (Mr. Brodrick) in his place, and he would know perfectly well, with regard to remount horses that were purchased, that supposing the First Army Corps were to be mobilized immediately, they would have the greatest difficulty in the world in obtaining the required number of animals. All the batteries which were now at Aldershot, and supposed to belong to the First Army Corps, had nothing like a full complement of horses. He had a full Return with him of what those batteries consisted, and to mobilize any one of them would require 80 horses, or more in some cases. When they came to 80 more horses for each battery, it meant that, in the event of its being necessary to mobilize the First Army Corps, they would have to fill up the gap by taking horses away from other batteries, and so leaving those batteries absolutely inefficient. He believed the Government were endeavouring to carry out the wishes of the House and the country with regard to the First and Second Army Corps; but the country would never believe or be satisfied that they had a First Army Corps until they saw it complete in the field with all the appliances, and especially the proper number of horses and quantity of transport, necessary. His hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the War Department would not get up and say that there was a proper amount of transport for the First Army Corps at this moment; and that if war should arise, and charge, as the horses did not at first that Army Corps might have to march at a moment's notice from Aldershot, it would be able to do so without experiencing the greatest difficulty in the matter of transport. The first thing that was necessary to every army which was likely to be called out was a full and sufficient amount of transport. That should be always provided. Without that we were nowhere, and until that was accomplished it was no use to tell us that we had a First Army Corps. He should like to know what steps had been taken, and in what position we were, both as regarded remount horses, which were absolutely necessary for making not only the Artillery, but also the Cavalry complete; for, as regarded the Cavalry, they had only a small number of horses in comparison with the number of men. It was because he did not wish to detain the Committee at that period of the Session, though the question was of paramount importance, that he asked his hon. Friend to state, so far as he was able, how many more horses were required to fill up both the Artillery and Cavalry, and also what amount of transport was ready for the First Army Corps?

MR. HANBURY (Preston)

said, he also should like, on this subject of horses, to know on what system the War Office was going to act with regard to the purchase of these animals? As he understood it, there was a fixed limit of price when the horses were purchased in England, beyond which the War Office could not go—a price fixed for Artillery and Cavalry horses. He had been informed, however, that the War Office had been purchasing horses in Canada, and that horses, when purchased abroad, cost a much higher sum than that which the authorities were allowed to pay in England. If this were the fact, he thought it was extremely unjust to the farmers of England and those concerned in the breeding of horses. If the War Office were allowed to give a higher price for horses purchased abroad than for those purchased in England, it would discourage the breeding of horses valuable for military purposes.

COLONEL BLUNDELL (Lancashire, S. W., Ince)

said, on this question he should like to say he thought the best place in the world for the breeding of horses was Ireland. Admiral Rous, who was the greatest authority we had had on horses in this country, was of opinion that there was nothing to equal the limestone pastures of Ireland foa the breeding of horses; and he (Colonel Blundell) would strongly impress upon the War Office to take note of that fact. The other point he would urge was this—it was well known that our regimental transport was the best that could be had; but we could not afford to keep it up. He would suggest to the Secretary of State for War that detachments under non-commissioned officers should be sent from each regiment to form part of the transport corps, and to act under transport officers. By doing that, when we wanted to send a force into the field we should always have a transport service ready without additional cost.

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY, WAR DEPARTMENT (Mr. BRODRICK) (Surrey, Guildford)

said, he agreed that the question which had been brought forward by the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for North-West Sussex (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) was a most important one. It was one which had occupied the attention of the Government very largely. The Government realized fully that it was absolutely necessary that they should have a First Army Corps in a position to take the field on short notice. The hon. and gallant Member had given special attention to the question of horses, and, in reply to his observations, he wished to say that while up to this moment we had no reserve of horses whatever, this year, for the first time, experiments had been tried in registering horses belonging to private owners at a fixed annual fee of 10s. These horses were available by the Government at a moment's notice, so that the Government, in a single day, could lay their hands upon the whole number of horses so registered. He was glad to say that the experiment had been entirely successful. The whole of the 7,000 horses, for which a Vote had been taken in this year's Estimates, were already available. A further step could be taken by the Government, and it would be possible to increase this reserve if the House would grant a further sum of money next year. The greater number of these horses was available mainly for transport; but a certain proportion of them also would be available for Artillery and Cavalry services. The fee charged for registration was, as he had said, 10s. per annum, and it would be seen that this was not too high a come in quickly. Now, however, they were coming in very quickly, and these horses would be the nucleus for our mobilization. Then, as to what fell from the hon. Member for Preston (Mr. Han-bury), he wished to state that the policy now adopted was to buy our remounts in this country. He believed the origin of the hon. Gentleman's remarks was this—that a small Commission had been sent out to Canada to purchase horses and investigate the desirability of adopting Canada as a purchasing field for horses. The Commission being an experimental one, the expense of purchasing these horses was out of proportion to the number of animals procured, and he believed that the expenses amounted to £52 per horse, which was in excess of the sum allowed for horses in this country—namely, £45. One of the advantages gained by the change in the method of purchasing horses was that whereas under the old system the market depended on the uncertain demands of the Cavalry regiments in certain neighbourhoods, now that the officers of the Government engaged in purchasing travelled about the country and adopted centres or depôts, the farmers would know from time to time where to send their horses. By centralizing the organization they were getting better class horses, and the farmers knew that if they brought their horses to a certain place at a certain time they would be purchased for the Cavalry or the Artillery. The hon. and gallant Member for the Ince Division (Colonel Blundell) had inquired as to the regimental transport. That subject had occupied the very careful consideration of the Quartermaster General, and he (Mr. Brodrick) quite admitted that there was a great deal in the suggestion of his hon. and gallant Friend. A nucleus of regimental transport had been formed, and the opinion which the hon. and gallant Gentleman had expressed in connection therewith would be considered—that was to say, the desirability of training a certain number of noncommissioned officers in transport duty. As to bringing up the Field Batteries of Artillery in the Army Corps to their full strength in regard to horses, the question was one on which the views of the Military Authorities would be most carefully considered by the Secretary of State.

VISCOUNT GRIMSTON (Herts, St. Alban's)

said, he begged to ask the hon. Gentleman if he would inform the Committee at what age these Cavalry re-mounts which were bought for £40 or £45 were obtained. Also, what would be the price given for horses if they were taken compulsorily incases of emergency? It would be interesting to the Committee to have information upon these points.

MR. BRODRICK

said, that the horses registered would be paid for at a higher price than other horses compulsorily taken in time of emergency. Their object was to buy horses at four years' old if they could, but to some extent horses were bought at a less price and kept for some time before being put into the service.

VISCOUNT GRIMSTON

asked whether, in the event of an emergency, the prices would be fixed prices?

MR. BRODRICK

said, that a higher price would be given for horses actually registered if taken on an emergency than would be paid to the owners of horses not so registered. He could not tell the noble Lord offhand what would be the price paid if horses were taken compulsorily.

SIR FREDERICK FITZ-WYGRAM (Hants, Fareham)

said, he desired to say a word upon this subject as one who had been long connected with Cavalry. It was possible, no doubt, by the system of registering, and other means, to obtain on an emergency a number of horses fit either for saddle or harness; but it would be absolutely impossible, in any similar way, to supplement the number of Cavalry recruits. It must be borne in mind that while it only took a few days under a system of registration to obtain horses, and only a week or so to train them to stand fire and the use of the sword over their heads, on the other hand, it took at least a year to train a Cavalry recruit so as to make him available for supplementing a Cavalry regiment. When they bore in mind the short period during which modern wars lasted, and how short and decisive modern campaigns were, it seemed to him that it should be their endeavour to maintain in strength and efficiency that portion of our military organization—namely, the Dragoons and Artillerymen—which it took the longest time to train and prepare. They could get the horses in time for modern warfare, but if the Cavalry and Horse Artillery and the other Artillery were deficient in men no power on earth and no wealth in the Treasury could provide the force we wanted. A change had been recently made in the system of remounting our Cavalry, and he regretted that change for one or two reasons. We had had two systems of remounting our mounted forces for many years in this country—one a system in which the Cavalry officers bought the horses and were responsible for their quality; and the other in the Artillery and Royal Engineers, where a selected officer was appointed to buy for the whole corps. Perhaps he might be some what prejudiced in the matter, but he believed that the Army generally would agree with him that the result of these systems was that the Cavalry was better mounted than the Artillery or Engineers, and that notwithstanding that saddle horses in this country were far scarcer and more difficult to obtain than draft horses, and notwithstanding that Cavalry horses were purchased at £5 less per head than Artillery horses. He thought there had been no sufficient reason shown for the change which had been brought about in the system of purchasing, and he very much regretted that it had occurred. He thought it would have the effect of lessening the competition which existed between regiments, and that pride which officers and men took in the breeding of these horses. Moreover, he did not see what advantage was to accrue from it. It had been said by the Secretary of State that the present system would bring into closer connection the breeder and the Government purchaser; but there was a fallacy in that, as the price given for the horses was a fixed price, and it would be the breeder who, by competition of buyers, would get the advantage, and not the contractors. Allusion had been made to Canadian horses, and he (Sir Frederick Fitz-Wygram) had been a Member of the Committee appointed by the Secretary of State to consider the question of buying horses abroad. The object was not to obtain horses in peace time, but to test the foreign markets as to the supply which could be obtained and the quality of the animals. On that Committee evidence was given by gentlemen interested in the foreign breeds with regard to the number of horses all fit for the bit and bridle which could be obtained on an emergency in their respective countries, which appeared to the Committee to be very doubtful. For instance, when he was Inspector General of Cavalry, an Austrian and Hungarian Commission came over to London and offered to produce 10,000 or any less number of horses at the London Docks from Austria-Hungary at £38 a-piece, all five years old, and 15–2 in height. The Committee of which he was Chairman recommended that that offer should be accepted as to 500 horses. They had sent out representatives to Austria, who stayed there six weeks, and they came back, not with 10,000 horses, for that number they were not authorized to buy, but with less than 500. They had been unable to buy even that number in that country. Few of those they did purchase were 15–2 in height, many were only 15–1, and a considerable number were under 15 hands high, and, generally speaking, they were four year old's instead of five year old's. Similar statements had been made in regard to other countries, but the result the Committee came to was that the statements made could not be depended upon at all, and that it would be extremely desirable to send out powers to buy a limited number of horses in foreign countries each year, in order to see the state of the market and whether the horses were fit for the work they were required to do. He thought it a good plan to test the foreign market from time to time to see what it was possible to do in the way of purchasing foreign animals. As to Canada, it was stated that 1,000 horses could be obtained there almost for asking, and the Government therefore had sent out a small Committee; but the result was that after travelling in that country for some time, and giving notice that they were ready to buy, they obtained only 75, of which only 50 were fit for bit and bridle; the remaining 25 being utterly untrained. The Canadian horses, such as were obtained, might be very good; but what was wanted was to ascertain whether Canada was capable of supplying a large number of horses. The desire of the Committee was to ascertain whether, in addition to the number of horses bred at home, they could procure the number from abroad which would be absolutely required in case of war. Something had been said about the desirability of encouraging the breeding of horses in this country. He believed that any attempt in this direction in order to establish a large reserve of horses in this country would be utterly futile. They could never in this or in any other country have any considerable number of horses in reserve beyond those required for the trade of the country. They could not do it, for the reason that each horse cost from £20 to £30 a-year to keep, and they could not put horses in stock as they could boots, shoes, and clothes. It was for this reason that the Commission of which he was Chairman felt the extreme desirability of testing how many horses could be purchased in, and in what foreign countries. During the time of the Egyptian War in 1882, the Remounting Commission bought in this country about 1,800 horses in about three months. Well, that demand for 1,800 horses had a sensible effect in decreasing the number of horses which were in the market for purchase. That went to endorse what he said—namely, that the number of horses fit for bit and bridle and saddle, surplus to the requirements of the country, were very few in this or, he believed, in any other country in the world. He believed that English horses were the best that could be got, and that every encouragement should be given to the English breeder, but he would remind the Committee that no encouragement could over cause to be bred any considerable number of horses beyond the number required for trading purposes in the country. When they had drained the country of horses to a certain extent, there would come a time when the owners of horses would require every one they possessed for the purpose of carrying on their trade, and would be unwilling to part with them, however high the price offered might be. He thought the Government had been most fortunate in their selection of their Re-mount Agent, and no doubt as long as Colonel Raven hill presided over the business, the system would be likely to answer. But they must remember that they had not always been equally successful in their buyer. It was a difficult thing to find men who could buy horses of all classes—namely, Cavalry, Transport, and Artillery horses. Generally speaking a man got his eye set upon one sort of horse, and was a good judge of that class, but of no other class. So far as the re-mount system was concerned, however, he believed it would get a fair trial under the President of the Remount Committee. He should not be at all surprised if it did not answer as well as the old system, and if it was found not to answer, the matter should be inquired into to see whether it could not be improved.

MR. BRODRICK

said, he had listened with a great deal of interest to the remarks of the hon. and gallant Gentleman who had just sat down, as he was an immense authority on the question of horses, and he could assure the hon. and gallant Gentleman that his remarks would receive the greatest attention. He was sorry the hon. and gallant Gentleman did not altogether approve of the change made in the system of procuring re-mounts; but he would point out that the system had been adopted after careful consideration, and that it had worked very well. On the other hand, he (Mr. Brodrick) was glad that the hon. and gallant Gentleman approved of the officer appointed to take charge of this matter of purchasing remounts. It was quite true that the competition of officers of regiments with each other in the purchase of horses might have been a good thing for the dealer, but it was not an equally good thing for the Government, because under that system every horse was bought at a high price.

SIR FREDRICK FITZ-WYGRAM

said, that that consideration made no difference, because the contract price of the dealer was fixed.

MR. BRODRICK

said, they were paying below the maximum price in some cases at the present moment, and the hon. and gallant Gentleman would, no doubt, give the new system a fair trial before condemning it.

MR W. P. SINCLAIR&c.) (Falkirk,

said, that he desired to ask a question of the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, and as he (Mr. Sinclair) was not a military man he would not detain the Committee any length of time on the subject. The question he wished to put was with regard to the First Army Corps. As a non-military man he ventured to say that this question was receiving considerable attention in the country, and that there was an increasing desire on the part of the public generally to see the First Army Corps ready to be sent out directly any emergency should arise. He should be glad, if within the compass of this Vote, the Government could say whether a complete Army Corps in all its departments of Cavalry, Infantry, Ambulance, Transport, and all other things necessary for its mobilization, could be sent into the field on short notice; and, if not, when the Government hoped that the First Army Corps would be in such a desirable position?

MR. BRODRICK

said, he thought he was right in saying that the demands made upon the Government up to now for the equipment of the First Army Corps had been carefully attended to. It was the desire of his right hon. Friend the Secretary for War to place the Army Corps in the position indicated by the hon. Gentleman.

MR. KIMBER (Wandsworth)

said, he should like to ask what was the precise effect of the registration of horses? Could the Government buy the horses registered at a fixed price?

MR. BRODRICK

said, that after registration the Government were in a position to have the horses immediately. The price paid to those who had not registered their horses would be somewhat lower than that paid to those who had registered their horses, when their horses were taken under the Compulsory Clauses of the Act bearing upon this subject.

Vote agreed to.

£2,509,000 (Provisions, Forage, &c.).

DR. FARQUHARSON (Aberdeenshire, W.)

said, he wished to take advantage of this opportunity to renew the protest he had made on previous occasions with regard to the important questions of soldiers' rations. In his opinion, the soldiers' rations were altogether of an insufficient character, and every time he had raised the question during the past three years, he had been told that the matter was under the consideration of the Government, and he must say he hoped it was under consideration, and the prominent consideration it was receiving would in the end have the effect of bringing about a change for the better. Though he had not been able to excite very much interest in this matter by his own advocacy, he was glad to see that the question was receiving attention in other quarters, and that, amongst other people, the gallant officer in charge of the gynasium at Alder shot had de- livered lectures at the United Service Institute on the subject, and on one occasion Lord Wolseley, Adjutant General to the Forces, had expressed a decided opinion that our soldiers were not sufficiently well fed. He had put before the House on many occasions a sketch of a soldier's diet, and he would briefly refer to that point once more. In the morning each man got for breakfast a cup of coffee, to which he might add milk and sugar if he chose to pay for it, and a piece of dry bread, and he might also add butter if he chose to pay for it; at 12 o'clock he got for his dinner ¾ of a pound of meat, including bone, and some potatoes; and at 4 o'clock he got some more coffee and bread. He got nothing between the 4 o'clock meal and breakfast again on the following day. This dietary was extremely badly arranged, especially for the recruit, who was mostly a growing lad from 18 to 19 years of age. They had to undergo hard work of an anxious and difficult character. The men were not well enough fed, and it had been deliberately settled that they should not get more rations, but should get extra pay, in order to enable them to supplement their official rations out of their own pockets. But they knew well what the soldier was, and what was the class of people from whom he came. Colonel On slow also suggested that the cost of giving extra food to the soldier might be recouped to the nation out of the deferred pay. It had also been proposed that the soldier should be given in the middle of the day—12 o'clock—a light meal of bread and cheese, and that the principal meat meal of the day should be deferred until five o'clock. That would give him something to go on until the next morning. There was no doubt that a great deal of crime in the Army was due to the fact that the men went out in the evening, and took drink on empty stomachs. He suggested that the Government should appoint a Committee of some kind to consider the whole question of soldiers' rations; he did not say it should be a Committee of the House; a Departmental Committee would, no doubt, be good enough. In view of the authoritative opinion on the question expressed by no less an important person than the Adjutant General of the Forces, he thought the time had come when the consideration of the sub- ject by the Government should assume some practical form.

SIR GUYER HUNTER (Hackney, Central)

said, that the question of rations was one on which there was great unanimity—there was unanimity on the part of the combatant officer, of the head of the medical service, and also of the various medical officers in the Service, that the rations of the soldiers were inadequate. He believed that were the inquiry suggested by his hon. Friend (Dr. Farquharson) made, it would be found that many of the diseases from which soldiers now suffered and the consequent depletion of the effective ranks were, in a great measure, the result of the inadequate amount of food given to the men. He trusted that the question would receive the consideration of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War.

MR. HANBURY (Preston)

said, they had heard something of the quantity of food which was allowed by the War Office to each soldier; but there was still another point to consider, and that was whether the soldier actually got the quantity allowed. He (Mr. Hanbury) had some doubt whether, either as to quality or weight, the soldier got what the War Office allowed him. He earnestly hoped his right hon. Friend would give his careful attention to the point. From all he heard, it was by no means the fact that the soldier got the food for which the country paid. He was not quite certain that in the different regiments sufficient care was taken by the orderly officers and the Quartermasters to see that the provisions came up to the proper standard. He would like to hear what was the procedure adopted in the inspection of the food. Was the Commissariat School at Alder shot still in existence? What steps were taken that the officers in each regiment, who were responsible not only for the weight, but for the quality of the food, were men in whom full trust could be placed?

COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)

said, he quite agreed with the hon. Member for Preston that the supply of rations required close attention, but did not always get it from the responsible officers. Of course, the hon. Gentleman's remarks applied particularly to the supply of meat. The bread ration was always properly inspected; but such was not the case with the meat. The inspection usually took place at 6 o'clock in the morning, and, owing to the early hour, it was often slurred over. Often a large quantity of bone, and sometimes of very inferior meat, was passed. He agreed with the hon. Gentleman the Member for East Aberdeenshire (Dr. Farquharson) that the present rations were inadequate. There were not many old soldiers in the ranks now; but old soldiers did not spend very much in bread, but they spent so much in drink. It was well known that the more beer a man drank the loss bread he would eat. He believed it was the fact that our bread ration was the lowest ration in Europe; the meat ration was not. If there was a strong reason in favour of raising the meat ration there was one reason against it. Meat could not be wasted, and the evidence given before the Committee was, that if the men got over a pound weight, there was no doubt some meat would be wasted. Whatever was done, it was not possible to touch the soldier's pay. The country had made a contract with its soldiers, and, therefore, it was totally impossible to touch any pay of any men at present in the ranks. Upon the question of the appointment of a Committee of Inquiry, he did not think a Departmental Committee would be as good a body for the purpose as a Committee of the House. Members of the House represented the classes from which recruits were drawn, and, therefore, they might be supposed to know the wants of the people.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. E. STANHOPE) (Lincolnshire, Horncastle)

said, he admitted that the question of rations was one of the greatest importance. After the evidence given before the Select Committee, and especially by a person so responsible as the Commander-in-Chief, that the meat rations were, in his opinion, inadequate, it became absolutely necessary for who ever was in the position of Secretary of State to go into the subject thoroughly. He felt it his duty to look thoroughly into the subject, and to exhaust it before coming to a decision. The hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for North Galway (Colonel Nolan) had suggested that it would be best that the inquiry should be conducted by a Committee of the House. There were several difficulties in the way of the adoption of that suggestion. In the first place, the inquiry, such as it was, should take place before the end of the year, or before the next Estimates were prepared, and a Committee of the House could not well sit until next year. He would, therefore, prefer a Committee which need not be purely Departmental, but which should be outside the House, a Committee which should have upon it men of the necessary knowledge and experience to enable a proper judgment to be arrived at. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Preston (Mr. Hanbury) had asked whether the soldier got the amount of meat allowed by the War Office, and whether the quality was as good as it ought to be? He (Mr. Stanhope) confessed that he did not feel himself capable to discuss that subject. He had heard a good many accounts, and some were undoubtedly in the same sense as those the hon. Member had spoken. He would undertake that the matter should come within the purview of the Committee, so that, if they did deal with the meat ration, it should be put on a satisfactory footing.

LORD HENRY BRUCE (Wiltshire, Chippenham)

said, he must earnestly maintain that three-quarters of a pound of meat was not enough for a young soldier. He had been told by officers who had risen from the ranks, that young soldiers got up from the dinner table hungry, and it had often been pointed out by officers of standing in the Army, and also by eminent medical officers, that we did not give our soldiers enough meat. If we wished to make our Army popular, as we ought to do, we should certainly provide them with a better ration. It might be true that some regiments got better rations than others. That might be, because the quartermaster of one regiment knew more about his business than the quartermaster of another regiment. It might also be because the quality of meat differed in different places. But his chief point was, that as a rule, young orderly officers were not competent to test the quality of meat. Could a young officer of 17 or 18 years of age be expected to know whether meat was good or bad, especially when he had to inspect it at 6 o'clock in the morning, often before the break of day? He held that the three leading men of a regiment, the colonel, the quartermaster, and the adjutant, should be held responsible for the quality of the rations supplied to the men. In the Colonies every soldier was allowed a pound of meat, without bone; whereas, in England, a soldier was only allowed three-quarters of a pound, with bone. If it was necessary to give a soldier abroad a pound of meat, it was equally necessary to give him that quantity here, where his work was harder. The sooner we saw that our men were better fed, the better recruits we would get, and the stronger our men would be when they were sent on foreign service.

MR. HANBURY

said, he trusted that the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War would not go through the long rigmarole of a Departmental Committee, or any other Committee, to remedy one or two points which everyone admitted were flaws in the present system, and which it was quite possible to remedy without much delay. The question whether three-quarters of a pound of meat, with or without bone, was sufficient for the subsistence of a soldier, might be one which a Departmental Committee might decide; but it was abundantly clear that as to the quality of the meat, the testing ought to be entrusted to men who had the knowledge to enable them to form a proper opinion. He, therefore, hoped his right hon. Friend would, without all the delay consequent on the appointment of a Committee, at once see that the testing of the rations of the British soldier was put in the hands of experienced officers, or other experienced persons.

GENERAL GOLDSWORTHY (Hammersmith)

said, he agreed with what had been said by most of the previous speakers. The quartermaster was responsible for the weight of the meat, but it was the orderly officer who was responsible for the quality of the meat, and many orderly officers had no knowledge whatever of what was good or bad meat. On two or three occasions, when he was Assistant Adjutant General at Cork, the meat was rejected, and when complaint was made, the Commissariat officer said, the fact was that the contract was too low. It was no use for the Government or the Commissariat to hope to get good meat for the soldiers, when they knew the contractor could not buy the meat at the price paid him. The soldier suffered. People did not like to complain. It was well known that many times things were passed over, simply because the private soldier did not like to complain. It was the duty of the officer responsible to see that the rations were all right, and it was the duty of the Government, through the Military Authorities, to see that the officers had that technical knowledge which enabled them to perform the duties required of them. He would be very glad if the Secretary of State for War would take some opportunity of seeing for himself the class of meat served out to our soldiers, because then the right hon. Gentleman would understand the question thoroughly. There were many things which the Secretary of State could look into personally, and in regard to which he could put pressure on the Military Authorities to keep their officers up to the mark. He (General Goldsworthy) considered that the rations were very much less than they ought to be, and that the Government ought to do all they could to make the position of the soldier equal to the men's position in private life, and thus do much to prevent desertion.

MR. E. STANHOPE

said, he wished he could be in several places at once and see more of what was going on. He assured the hon. Member for Preston (Mr. Hanbury) that there should be no unnecessary delay. If lie was satisfied that anything was going wrong, he would certainly not wait for the Report of the Committee.

COLONEL BLUNDELL (Lancashire, S.W., Ince)

, said, he could not for one moment admit that the meat supplied to the Army was not properly inspected. He inspected meat for many years, and he certainly had always seen it examined very carefully. He thought, however, that an inquiry was very advisable. If anyone were to go on board one of our ships, he would see that our sailors were given a very much better breakfast than was served out to our soldiers. At the same time, our soldiers got far more meat than any other soldier. It was perhaps as well that the supply should be exclusive of bone. The bread ration, together with the tea bread, was rather more than was necessary; probably a satisfactory re-arrangement of rations might be made.

Vote agreed to.

(3.) Motion made, and Question proposed. That a sum, not exceeding £643,300, be granted to Her Majesty to defray the Charge for the Superintending Establishment of, and Expenditure for, Engineer Works, Buildings, and Repairs, at Home and Abroad, which Will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1839.

SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT (Sussex, N.W.)

said he wished to make one or two remarks upon this Vote. His right hon. Friend was perfectly well aware that it was absolutely necessary that some great alteration should be made in many of the barracks in the country. Of course, it was of the utmost possible importance that we should keep our soldiers in a healthy condition; and we could not do that if we housed them in unhealthy barracks, such as the Royal Barracks in Dublin. It was reported that upwards of £40,000 had been expended on the Royal Barracks. Whether that was so or not he did not know, but he had in his hands a letter from a gallant friend of his, formerly a Member of the House, whose son had been seized with typhoid fever in the Royal Barracks. This was early in the year. His informant had gone over there to nurse his son, and he found that there were no less than four officers of the 4th Dragoon Guards who had been struck down by the fever. His informant told him that his son was in what was called the Palatine Square, and on the same staircase poor Mr. Campbell, of the Black Watch, had died shortly afterwards. Cases of fever were perpetually occurring in the Royal Barracks. It had been said, his informant went on to say, that certain works had been commenced and that certain portions of the barracks had been made healthy, but taking the barracks as a whole they were in much the same condition as they were when he (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) was quartered there. Palatine Square, where the junior officers of Cavalry and Infantry were quartered, had never yet been healthy. He (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) thought that, at any rate, the right hon. Gentleman ought to make a great effort to see that the barracks, which were, no doubt, in a good situation as far as strategical and other purposes were concerned, should be made healthy. His informant also told him that the proposed site of the new barracks was between a cemetery and the public abattoir. He put it to his right hon. Friend whether these were not questions which deserved his most serious consideration.

COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)

said, the Committee took evidence in regard to the condition of the barracks of the country, and Sir Redvers Buller and many other eminent officers pointed out the great necessity there was for improvement. All the witnesses pointed to the Galway Barracks as being not only the worst barracks in Ireland, but in the United Kingdom. The Galway Barracks were in a shocking state. Many of the buildings were more than 100 years old, and required renewal. He trusted the Secretary of State for War would, if possible, turn his attention to the Galway Barracks without any delay. There was another subject to which he desired to draw the attention of hon. Members. It was a question of general interest, and possibly applied on a much larger scale to Vote 12, which was not to be taken that day. It did, however, apply to the present Vote to a certain extent. He referred to the question of how contracts for stores were given out.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. E. STANHOPE) (Lincolnshire, Horncastle)

said, that if they discussed the question of contracts upon that Vote very much time would be occupied.

COLONEL NOLAN

said, the question was one of great importance; but he found the greatest difficulty in getting it taken up. He was greatly in favour of the principle of open competition.

THE CHAIRMAN

hoped the hon. and gallant Gentleman would keep his remarks within the limits of the present Vote.

COLONEL NOLAN

said, that what he desired was that all the stores and works under this Vote should be put up to open competition.

MR. E. STANHOPE

The stores are taken on Vote 12.

COLONEL NOLAN

said, that between £100,000 and £200,000 worth of stores were provided for under that Vote. If the right hon. Gentleman was in a position to say that everything under the present Vote was put up to open competition, he would make no further remarks on the subject of the advisa- bility of putting everything up to open contract. It was of very great importance that there should be advertised contracts. The key of the whole position was, whether the price of the successful contract was disclosed. A circular was lately issued——

THE CHAIRMAN

The hon. and gallant Gentleman's remarks are not relevant to this Vote, which relates to contracts for buildings.

COLONEL NOLAN

said, that he would confine his remarks to contracts for buildings. If the whole of the buildings provided for under this Vote were put up to open and advertised contracts, he would——

MR. E. STANHOPE

said, that personally he was anxious that these contracts should be put up to open competition, but there were many difficulties in the way.

COLONEL NOLAN

said, that if the Department were only to let the Irish contractors compete for the buildings, they would find a very wide area of competition. But he did not bring that forward as an Irish question or an Irish grievance in any shape or form; he brought it forward as a general question. The amount of contracts not put up to open competition was extremely large. He understood that the Secretary of State for War was impressed with the necessity of, at any rate, increasing the area of competition; but, as a general rule, the contracts of the War Department were not put up to open competition.

THE CHAIRMAN

Order, order!

COLONEL NOLAN

said, that he meant to confine his remarks to the Vote under discussion. Under this Vote, £200,000 worth of contracts were not put up to open competition, and the price of the successful contract was not disclosed. He did not think they would ever get things as cheap under any system as under that of open contract. The Department could have the work inspected, and they ought to have sufficient confidence in their engineer officers to know that they would get good work. He knew there were many arguments urged against open contracts. He knew that the Trades Unions took a different view of the matter to the contractors who were in the habit of supplying the War Department. He believed that very often they would, under the system he advocated, get things under cost price.

THE CHAIRMAN

I must again beg the hon. and gallant Gentleman to keep to the question of buildings to which the Vote relates.

COLONEL NOLAN

said, he was sorry if he inadvertently strayed from the questions covered by the Vote. He put it to the Secretary of State for War, that if he did not disclose the price paid for the buildings, there could be no real competition. He admitted that the successful contractor for a building might not like anyone to know how cheaply he was doing the work; but still, on the whole, the advantages of open competition greatly outweighed the disadvantages. They never would have contracting altogether removed from the suspicion of jobbery until they made jobbery nearly impossible. It could be made impossible, or very nearly so, if they adopted the system of open tender, and of disclosing the price of the successful tender. He did not suggest that the prices of the unsuccessful tenders should be disclosed. The unsuccessful contractors might not wish to show their hands; but the public would hear of it, if the work was given to any but the lowest tenderer.

MR. E. STANHOPE

said, that in answer to his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for North-West Sussex (Sir Walter B. Barttelot), he had to say that it was true strong evidence was given before the Committee with regard to the condition of different barracks. It was proposed to spend £40,000 during the coming year in improving the condition of barracks. He had reduced the sum to that amount on account of the special effort which was being made that year to strengthen the fortifications. He quite admitted that the question of barrack accommodation throughout the country required attention, and that in some particular cases it required early attention. In the Recess he proposed to devote his attention specially to the matter of improved barrack accommodation. His hon. and gallant Friend (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) had referred to the condition of the Royal Barracks, Dublin. The hon. and gallant Gentleman was aware that most of the recommendations made by the Committee which sat on the Royal Barracks had been or were now being carried out. Amongst the recommendations there was a proposal that certain portions of the Royal Barracks should be pulled down. The Department were not exactly carrying out the different proposals made by the Committee, but they were pulling down certain portions of the barracks in the hope that the alterations would tend to the better health of the men quartered there. He assured his hon. and gallant Friend that the Department would turn their attention most carefully to the Royal Barracks, because he thought it was a scandal that there should be constant cases of illness arising there. If science could prevent such unfortunate occurrence, every step should be taken. His hon. and gallant Friend referred to the proposed site of the new barracks. He believed, though he was not certain, that the site was between the cemetery and the public abattoir. The subsoil water had been found to be absolutely impure. He was afraid there was considerable difficulty in finding a thoroughly healthy site anywhere in Dublin, and that the illness in the Royal Barracks and other barracks had arisen just as much from the general insanitary condition of Dublin as from any defects in the barracks. The hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for North Galway (Colonel Nolan) had spoken of the contracts for buildings. He would like to say at once, that, personally, he was in favour of open contracts, and he should like to see that system adopted as far as it possibly could be. But it was utterly impossible to adopt the system in all cases of buildings. For instance, in some cases, such as fortifications, special work was required, and it could not be obtained through the system of open contracts.

GENERAL GOLDSWORTHY (Hammersmith)

said, he hoped the Secretary of State for War, when considering the question of the improvement of the general barrack accommodation of the country, would turn his attention to the desirability of redistributing some of the troops in the country. At the present moment they were sent to localities which did not require them, because of the buildings that were there. Some of the buildings were not suitable. If we housed the troops worse than the civil population were housed, and without the same sanitary arrangements, we might depend upon it we would not get a good class of men to join the Army.

MR. E. STANHOPE

said, that undoubtedly that was one of the greatest considerations the Government could have to consider.

SIR FREDERICK FITZ-WYGRAM (Hants, Fareham)

said, he did not think the statement of the Secretary of State for War, that the unhealthiness of the Royal Barracks was due to the unsanitary conditions of the City of Dublin, could hardly be considered conclusive, because typhoid fever had for years past—certainly for 30 years past—occurred in only one particular square of the barracks. Such cases were not known in the Royal Square, or other squares of the barracks. He believed the reason was that the Palatine Square was closed up on all four sides, whilst the Royal Square and other squares were open. They could not attribute the outbreaks to the general conditions of Dublin, but must attribute them to local and special causes.

MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W.)

said, he had to submit to the Committee a complaint on behalf of the Harbour Commissioners of Belfast against the War Department. The facts of the complaint were disclosed in a Memorial presented by the Commissioners. Some three years ago, the War Department, through the Military Authorities at Belfast, approached the Commissioners and requested them to grant a piece of ground for the site of a submarine mining establishment at Belfast. The application was made not once, but several times. The correspondence extended over two years, and last year the Commissioners agreed to grant, at a nominal rent, a piece of ground for the purpose. The War Department assented. The Commissioners came to the conclusion that the matter was arranged, and, indeed, closed, and they instructed their solicitor to draw up a lease granting a piece of ground at a nominal rent. The solicitor prepared the lease, and nothing remained to be done except the signing of the document. Suddenly, in the month of April last, the Commissioners, to their amazement, learnt from the War Department that they did not intend to sign the lease, did not intend to have the site they originally intended, but had decided to employ a ship as a joint barrack and submarine mining store. The Commissioners found that they could trust no longer to correspon- dence, and accordingly they came to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War. The subject was debated, and the effect of the interview was set out in one paragraph of the Commissioners' Memorial—namely, A deputation of your memorialists thereupon waited on the Secretary of State in reference to the matter, and he agreed with them that a land establishment would be preferable to a vessel for the purpose, and said that provision had been made in the Estimates for the cost of the establishments. The right hon. Gentleman would not question that account of the interview. He (Mr. Sexton) was at a loss to understand why the Department, having, as a result of correspondence extending over a couple of years, agreed to take a piece of land and place upon it a submarine mining store, should have suddenly changed their mind. He did not think that the Harbour Commissioners had been either fairly or respectfully treated. They had been put to the trouble of again and again considering the question, and they had been put to some expense in preparing the lease. It was unfair for the War Department to play fast and loose with a public Body because it happened to be an Irish public Body. The Commissioners objected to a ship being made the store. They said it would be impossible, owing to the demand for space for commercial purposes, to provide a quay berth for the vessel except at very heavy expense. The port of Belfast was not a port to be treated in that way. It was the first commercial port of Ireland, and it stood third amongst all the ports of the United Kingdom. London being first, Liverpool second, and Belfast third. The port of Belfast supplied a large proportion of the funds which enabled the War Department to execute its work. On behalf of the Harbour Commissioners of Belfast, he protested against the course pursued by the War Department. There had been an entire failure on the part of the Government to carry out a specific contract with the Commissioners of Belfast. There was no sum of money included in the Vote for the carrying out of the contract, but he would move the reduction of the Vote.

THE CHAIRMAN

said, the hon. Member would not be in Order in this, because there was no item in the Vote for carrying out the work to which he referred.

MR. E. STANHOPE

said, there were no doubt communications between the Commissioners of Belfast and the War Office with regard to a site for a submarine mining establishment, and the position was that they had got very near a point of agreement. But it turned out that the site was not suitable for the purpose intended, and that a considerable amount of money would be saved by placing the stores upon a ship instead of on land. It was for that reason that a change had been made. The War Office were desirous of protecting the port of Belfast by a proper submarine mining defence, and they now thought it the best course to put a ship there instead of erecting a building on shore. If the Commissioners approached him on the subject, he should be most glad to meet them, and had no doubt that they would be able to arrive at an agreement. He assured the hon. Gentleman that there had been no disrespect whatever shown towards the Commissioners, and the idea that there was must, he thought, be the result of a misunderstanding. No money was taken for this purpose in the present Vote, because it came under the head of Submarine Mining in Vote 12.

MR. SEXTON

said, he was willing to believe that the right hon. Gentleman had stated the matter according to his memory. He had heard the statement of the Commissioners, which could not be readily put aside. Their Memorial said that they waited on the Secretary of State for War, and that he agreed with them that a land store was preferable to a vessel, and that he had stated that provision had been made in the Estimates. That point he could not set aside. He thought that the unanimous testimony of the Commissioners was about as authoritative as anything in the world, and they said it would be impossible to provide a quay berth for the vessel, except at a very heavy expense. But, as the Chairman ruled that his former proposal was out of Order, he would move the reduction of the Vote to be allotted to Belfast by the amount for new works and additions.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding, £637,620, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Sexton.)

MR. MOLLOY (King's Co., Birr)

said, this was one of those controversies which had been going on for years, culminating in an agreement between the Commissioners of Belfast and the War Office. The Commissioners wanted considerable additions to the defensive works in their harbour; the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War had not made a single objection to that, and an agreement was made, and they went to considerable trouble in considering the expense in preparing a lease, and having prepared a lease they were simply told that it was not the intention of the Government to carry out the verbal agreement made with them. Now, he did not think that this was proper treatment to extend to the Commissioners of a port which stood third in importance in the United Kingdom. The right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War said that it was proposed to place a ship in the harbour in which to store the very dangerous matters that would be required. He altogether objected to the placing of explosives in a ship in a harbour in which there was a large number of merchant ships. It was elementary knowledge that this would be a most dangerous thing to do; and, moreover, as the space required would be very large, it would add greatly to the expenses of the port. It would, therefore, be less dangerous and considerably cheaper to place the materials on land. But, in opposition to the Harbour Commissioners, who were the first people to be considered in this question, and whose views had been stated and adopted by the War Office Authorities, it had been decided to place these dangerous materials on board a ship which was to be moored among the commercial craft in the port. Under the circumstances, having listened to the answer of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War and the remarks of his hon. Friend, he was bound to say that nothing had been advanced to excuse the position in which the right hon. Gentleman had placed the Commissioners, or the placing of a ship in the midst of the shipping in the port having on board these explosive materials.

MR. SEXTON

said, he was sure the right hon. Gentleman did not intend to treat the Commissioners with any disrespect, and it was very far from his intention to imply that he had done so. He understood that the right hon. Gen- tleman positively stated that the matter was one for investigation.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

(4.) £1,343,900, Out-Pensions.

(5.) £720,700, Volunteer Corps.

MR. MOLLOY (King's Co., Birr)

asked, if the Government would say whether they had finally decided against the proposal that Richmond Park should be given up for the annual meeting of the National Rifle Association?

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. E. STANHOPE) (Lincolnshire, Horncastle)

said, he imagined that this was so, but he was not then in a position to make any announcement on the subject.

COLONEL LAURIE (Bath)

said, although very unwilling to take up the time of the Committee, he was obliged to call attention to some facts in relation to the Volunteer Forces. Under the localizing of forces scheme, Volunteer regiments of particular districts were placed under the command of officers commanding in regimental districts. He thought the scheme for localizing the component parts of the Army and bringing them together under one head was extremely good. Volunteers were responsible to an officer selected by the Commander-in-Chief for the regimental district; and they were also to be under the command of some new brigadier, whose functions he did not know. There could surely be no good reason for placing them under a dual control. At present Volunteer officers did not know who was their commanding officer. These Rules had been announced with a considerable flourish of trumpets, but he found that many of the appointments made were not calculated to satisfy Volunteer officers. He found that the Government had been appointing Militia officers to the command of Volunteer brigades; but looking through the Volunteer Regulations he could find no allusion whatever to the command of Volunteers being handed over to any other branch of Her Majesty's Auxiliary Forces. He ventured to think that the appointment of Militia officers for these commands was not in accordance with the Regulations; and in the opinion of many officers it was exceedingly unfair to men who had worked so steadily and well for the Volunteer Forces. He found that a noble Lord who was captain and honorary major was to be appointed colonel and have the command of a brigade. He had no doubt that the Secretary of State had power to do this, but he doubted the wisdom of exercising it. Was it because this honorary major was a noble Lord that he was placed over the heads of efficient volunteer officers? He was quite unable to understand the grounds of the appointment. If these appointments were necessary at all, he thought it was absolutely unwise and unnecessary for the Government to appoint officers over the heads of many men who were quite competent to take command.

MR. E. STANHOPE

said, that, so far as he could learn, these appointments had been received with approval throughout the country; but he believed it would also be recognized that they had been made with the strictest impartiality and with the desire of getting the very best men available for the command of the Volunteer brigades. He believed that offence had not been given to officers of the Volunteer Forces, because men had been selected for command upon their merits, because it was the desire that men should be put in command of brigades who had served not merely as Volunteers. He could say that there was no man more likely to make a good brigade officer, or one who was more fitted for the post, than the noble Lord to whom the hon. and gallant Gentleman had referred. He trusted after these statements that the Committee would allow the Vote to be taken, otherwise he felt that he should be obliged to withdraw it.

MR. TOMLINSON (Preston)

said, it was desired by the authorities that, whenever possible, the Volunteers should go into large camps; but the difficulty in the way of their doing this was that they were required to send in their applications at so early a period of the year that it was impossible for them to fix the period at which it was possible to go into camp. He hoped that arrangements would be made which would allow a longer time in which to exercise the option of joining in one of the large military camps.

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY, WAR DEPARTMENT (Mr. BRODRICK) (Surrey, Guildford)

said, the hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. Tomlinson) had brought forward an important point, and consideration would be given to the suggestion he had made with a view to meeting it.

Vote agreed to.