MILITIA BALLOT BILL [H.L.] (Hansard, 31 July 1903)

§ THE EARL Of WEMYSS:
My Lords, the Bill which I hold in my hand is the measure referred to in the latter part of the Question to which the noble Duke has just replied. I thank my noble friend the President of the Committee of Imperial Defence for his courteous statement, and I quite admit the soundness of his arguments for not giving an answer. But it seemed to me that it was desirable to keep this Question, which deals with the very foundation of military defence, alive. The Bill is, in fact, Lord Lansdowne's Bill, introduced when he was Secretary of State for War; and when the noble Marquess presented the Bill he admitted that the present law with regard to the Militia Ballot is obsolete and requires to be amended, and he stated that this Bill was for the purpose of bringing the Militia Ballot up to date. It is an absurd position for any nation to occupy to have 1034 a military system which rests as its sure foundation on the Militia Ballot, on compulsory home service, and then to allow a measure of this kind, brought in by the Minister for War, to meet an emergency that may at any rate arise, to be on the Table. I have simply put this Bill down, as I have said, to keep the matter alive; and I formally move the Second Reading in case any noble Lord wishes to say anything on the subject. It is a matter which should be dealt with by the Government. I should like to quote from a preface to a pamphlet on the Militia and Volunteers which was issued in February of this year, because it expresses exactly the present situation with regard to military matters:— In these days, when so much is said and written re Army re-organisation; when so-called re-organisation is being attempted by building on the 'bed rock' of thinnest air, to the ignoring and neglect of our existing military system which rests absolutely in principle—aye, and in law, annually suspended—on the Crown's immemorial right to call upon its subjects to serve compulsorily for Home Defence; and when the possibility of our Navy failing to ensure our food supply in time of war has led to the formation of the Food Supply in Time of War Association—it seems to me useful to republish some matter bearing upon Home Defence and our existing military system. Further, I would point out, when it is said that our Navy is an all-sufficient security against invasion, that the coracles, or navy, of the period did not keep the Vikings from our shores, nor prevent the successful occupation of Britain by the Romans for 400 years; also that the navy of the day did not save us from the Norman invasion and conquest; nor prevent the landing of William of Orange in England, nor of the Pretender in Scotland, nor of General Hoche in Ireland. The fact is that no nation in the world has been so variously and successfully subjected to invasion as the British people, in whose veins now runs the mixed blood resulting therefrom, plus in some quarters, a Spanish infusion due to the Armada wreckage on our coasts. And well would it he for us now if we had a good Queen Bess ruling at the Admiralty and War Office, for, not satisfied with her fleets and sea power under the Howards, Drakes, and Frobishers of the period, she had our Home Land Defences so completely organised that it was even laid down how many horse shoes and nails each company should carry as part of its equipment. Since then 300 years and more have come and gone. Let the War Office say whether or no our means of land defence are in the days of Edward the VII., relatively equivalent to those of the Elizabethan period of our history. If not, let the nation insist on their being made so, without an hour's delay, by putting in force our existing military system, and by casting all novel, costly, vain, military imaginings to the winds. 1035 You are going to take 25,000 men out of England and station them in South Africa, therefore the defensive power of England will be 25,000 men short. General Peel introduced a Militia Army Reserve under which the Militia gave voluntarily a certain number of men—30,000ߞto the Army. He intended that for every one so given another should be raised, but that has not been done and the Militia Reserve has been abolished; therefore the Army is 30,000 men short on that head alone. I think this state of things requires very serious consideration on the part of the Government. Ministers should do their duty by the nation and put in force the Act which they annually suspend. There is no nation, civilised or uncivilised, that has a military system where those who are responsible for its administration and for the safety of the nation have not the courage to enforce it. I do not think the public would object, but the Government fear that votes might be lost if they enforced compulsory home defence. I have some right to speak on this subject with knowledge, because two or three years ago I issued a circular to all lords-lieutenant, chairmen of County Councils, chairmen of quarter sessions, mayors, provosts and other officials throughout the country, asking them whether they were satisfied with our present state of national defence, and seventy-five per cent. replied that they were not satisfied. The second question I put to them was whether they believed that the people of this country would accept ballot for the Militia in an amended and simple form. At present ballot for the Militia means that every man from eighteen to forty-five years of age is liable. All that is needed is that every man who attains the age of twenty and is not serving the State in the Army, the Navy, the Volunteers, the Police, or in some other form, should be liable to ballot for the Militia. The replies I received to the effect that the writers thought the nation would accept such a modification were two to one of the total.
It is, of course, folly to think of proceeding at this time with this Bill, and I have only moved it in order to draw attention to the present state of things.
1036 I do not ask that the Government should enforce the ballot, but that they should bring it to that state at which it is available if needed. At present it is of no value at all. I hope this subject will be considered by the Commission to which the question of the Militia and Volunteer forces has been referred, and that they will take a sensible view of it and recommend the adoption of this Bill. I resigned my commission in the Volunteers because I felt that that force was being used by the Government in order to save them from doing what they would have to do if the Volunteers did not exist, namely, pass this Bill and put the Militia Ballot into force. The new policy adopted by the Government in regard to the Volunteers has reduced the number of that force by 100,000 men. Instead of having a small force highly trained, the right idea should be to have a large body of Volunteers sufficiently trained, so that when the alarm came they would, by a little drilling, be efficient to take their place in home defence. I think the view that has been taken by the War Office of the place in our defensive position of the Volunteers is an entirely wrong one. The whole spirit of the Volunteer force is that it is for home defence, and for home defence only; and yet the Government are encouraging them to go abroad. I know as regards my own regiment that they sent out one or two gallant companies to South Africa, but I contend that before they went out they should have resigned, their positions in the Volunteer regiments, because otherwise you have the "stay-at-homes" and the "go-and fights," which is contrary to the whole spirit of the force. Let us hope that through the action of the Commission to which my noble friend has referred some good may be done. I formally move the Second Reading of the Bill.

§ THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE For WAR (The Earl of HARDWICKE)
My Lords, I do not rise for the purpose, of following the noble Earl 1037 in the remarks he has addressed to the House, because I think that the noble Duke behind me has given a sufficient reason for not consenting to the Second Reading of this Bill. I only rise to repeat to the noble Earl what I stated earlier in this session, that it is really not quite fair to His Majesty's Government, or to the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who introduced this Bill when Minister for War, to say that having introduced the Bill the noble Marquess then left it on the Table without making any effort to induce the Government to proceed with it. The noble Marquess stated distinctly on introducing the Bill that it was a tentative measure, that he did not intend to proceed with it, and could not. hold out any hope that it would be proceeded with that session, or in any subsequent session. If the noble Earl supposes that this Bill will remedy the present chaotic and discordant series of Acts of Parliament which have to do with the Militia Ballot and the Militia, he is very much mistaken. All that this Bill does is to show prominently certain lines on which it will be necessary, if it is ever intended to put the Militia Ballot into force, to prepare a further Bill, which will have to take the form of a consolidating Bill. Since I have been at the War Office this subject has been very thoroughly gone into, and if such a Bill is to be brought in it will have to be one of about ninety clauses, and containing some sixty or seventy pages.

§ THE EARL OF WEMYSS
I beg to withdraw the Bill, but I think the noble Earl's explanation makes the Government case much worse.
Motion and Bill (by leave of the House) withdrawn.