The Sun.
London, England, 1852-02-21 00:00:00

saying
to us, " You shall not produce your own Bill On
this subject, but you shall take One of my coecocion, of
which I shall not tell you all the clauses, but leave you
to fled them out as you best can." Why, there was
never such a demand made on a Government before.—
Sfieer, hear.) Of course I cannot comply with that
enaaad; for if I proposed to satisfy the House by fol-
lovitg the injunctions of the Noble Lord and bringing
aneeher Bill, the Noble Lord might say, " This is not
through the session."—(llear.) With respect to the
difference between the proposition of the Government
and that of the Noble Lord, there is one point which the
Noble Lord seems to have omitted altogether, although
It lig, perhaps, one of the most important at issue. The
question is to obtain a force sufficient in number fur the
PUrpoie of being trained to act under arms, which shall
the removable in case of danger from one part of the
for Kingdom to another, and which can be kept up
'or a certain time in case of war. But then occurs the
difficultY, In the case of a regular militia the men are
ballotted for service for a period of five years, conse-
quently if a war should break out in the course of this
Year—say in six months—these men would be obliged
to serve for five years. This, bows ver, is a different
demand on the people of this country from that made
by her Majesty's Government in the vreseet measure,
which is, that those so ballotted for shall appear
far 28 days in time of peace to learn the use
of arms, end to serve for six or twelve months in
case of war. And the questien arises which the
Noble Lord would not discuss, hut which is
at the bottom of ali—the question of substitutes. Will
You say that you are to have no substitutes, and that
those leen who are balloted fur must serve in person? I
am convinced that if this was proclaimed through the
country to-morrow, the Bill would be so unpopular with
all clauses of the community, ti.at there would be the
greatest possible difficulty iu carrying out its provisions.
--(Cheers.) But (here is the other course—you may
say you will take substitutes. That would be an easy

course in one respect; for there can be no doubt that
for a sum of money varying from 30s. to 5/. or 61., you
might get any number of substitutes to appear tied be
trained to arms for twenty-eight days in any one year
of peace. But observe the difference between the sub-
etitutes and the force proposed by this Bill in time of
war. When you piece a ballotted man in the ranks of
the militia in time of war, he is bound by the Mutiny
Act, he cannot desert, and he is sate for the terms of
his five years' service. But if you offer 51., in the county
of Kent to a man to come forward as a substitute, and
0 serve twenty-eight days in time of peace, for twenty-
. 'kat days a, you wilt nd plen ot them in 152.
Who wilt teplly me, heaevfier, that this man will coBme
back the following year without further bounty,
after eleven months' absence, perhaps in a far
distant part of the country, even in a period of peace—
(Hear, hear)—abuve all, who will tell me that he will
Come back in a time of war to work out the further set-
, "ice he is paid to periorm?—(Hear, Lean) Yoe seem,
therefore, to me, to be placed in this dilemma—either
You must make a law which will be sufficient, but op-
Pressive, and which consequently cannot be carried into
effectual operation; or, you must make a law not op-
Measly°, but, on the other hand, cosily and not sufficient.
If You have a ballot, and make the sons of merchants
and mechanics serve together itt the ranks of the mili'ia,
You will have a sufficient force, no doubt, but you will
also have an intolerable hardship. Take substitutes, on
the contrary, and you will have a force in time of peace
More than sufficient for your purpose, but ou will have
none in a time of war.—(Bear, bear.) I do not offer
these arguments as conclusive on the question: the
you.e will, no doubt, weigh them impartially, and ad-
Judge them their full worth in deciding this question.
thelf House thinks the proposition of the Noble
-word better than the proposition of the Go-
terntneet they will of course adopt it. But
*hat I Fay is this—and I think I make no extravagant
demand—that after considering the subject carefully
!ad attentively for many weeks, and coming to
the conclusion that the plan we propose is the one least
that
to the difficulties that I have stated•—it may be
'nut We have not come to the right conclusion—but un-
der these circumstances I do say that I think it would
Dot be fair in the House to as>, you shall not produce
Your Plan. It, however, you should do so, and leave
Out the word "local"—the word " consolidate" I will not
take the sense of the House on—and insert "
all I can say is that the Noble Lord and Mr. Bernal
must bring in the Bill themselves, and I shall judge it
tuPartially, holding myself free to oppose it or support
It aecordiugly as I may see fit.—(Rear.)
I)IIIZIELI—The Noble Lord has certainly
°Poken the most remarkable speech I have ever heard
rn this house.—/Sear.) The Noble Lord proposed to
introduce a measure which has been, he states, amply
considered, but which is founded, we are told, upon a
vicious principle. Now, if the principle of the Bill is
/trio", all its details must necessarily be vicious, and
„..te)reforti it is a mere waste of time on the part of this
kit se to enter into any controversy upon either.—
(Cheers )
I understand the Noble Lord to say, that
though a Member of this House, or even a majority of
uembers, may consider the principle of a Bill so essen-
tially 'vicious that it would be utterly impossible it could
I's changed with any advantage, it is nevertheless not
men to uo to question the propriety of introducing that
tasure. If the Noble Lord's argument does not lead
%that conclusion I have entirely misunderstood it.
stood•L°rd J. RUSSELL—You have quite misunder-
le
n fir, DISRAELI—If I have misunderstood the Noble
4-4.tetel's argument I do not think I have misrepresented
'••••(Hear, hear.) I ask the House to consider how it is
tweed with respect to the question before us. Four or
;end 6 hears ago, when the Noole Lord was still at the
of affairs, Government assured the House they were
tit to bring torward the question—the question hay-
, 11,°.! relation to the militia. The Noble Lord did not,
kt:revert introduce any Bill, or favour the House with
'!ut details of any contemplated measure. I should have
yr4d to know whether the Government project was for
el, or regular militia; but the House was nut favoured
;alth the information. It is clear, from the circutn-
laces under which the present measure is introduced,
%ea
in. been
period at which it is brought forward, there hay-
etV'een antecedent revolutions, and, more recently,
nlen7 alarming circumstances—it is clear the Govern-
' it4t opinion is in favour of the general principle of
of he a and also that they believe the defences
laeee country are not so effectual as they ought to be.
teneerefore, in bringing forward their measure, it is not
vrhtesi:ei•Y, I think, to refer it to important circumstances
hoe ,_have recently occurred. The House and country
serer 4'o advaetage of considering the question with re-
it' in ei° the abstract point—namely. whether the country
coullt" at Position of defence in which every equally great
rar ought to be.—(Hear, heur.) It appears, wt
tittelsr:cePtions, that all are agreed to decide the
w▪ st what plan can an effectual domestic garrison
ide obtained? When Government, after four years'
ae one raciet, of the question, after a lapse of time which
in 188 Pretends has rendered defence less necessary than
sere the ~when Government now introduces a measure
eureeastlaiect, I think, taking the most peaceful view of
toner; uffairs, and of the probable course of human
effeert; that we have a right to consider on what the
favours The
Pl‘nieciple of the proposed means of defence is
iaveeren it„the details with which the Noble Lord has
session -ore !Lose does not put us sufficiently in pos-
olitilterojeci: that Principle. If a Minister brings forward
use ought to say whether it is founded
etttraentla principles. If the House were of opinion
leered Je tikeas all-important, and ought not to be ueg-
teen, in
th present state of affairs, it is a matter of
ante which
we should decide on the principle of the mea-
n) the Government proposes for our adoption. As
end
de means and method of ballotting, and the modes
nest details of enlistment, we can enter into all those
o_2nons of detail in Committee; but if the Bill be
reesuled on principles which will not have the
the Hot
the House wishes—if in the opinion of
all
.8 the Bill cannot lead to the result which
desire to see a accomplished—if
brought forward Government have
utymteoasure inefficient and unsatisfac-
tory, it is our d
ID 1 on la he
e w t express our opinion as to the
Bill is founded. When the Noble
Lord says, if the
miundtnent he
Hour assent to the Noble Lord the
Q Bill on'
Member for 'Tiverton's A
responsibility
of bringingt a tune to adopt, must throw the
that Noble Lord—
menn.e because it shows a
tdittst, I think, is no
Which cannot be ac-
,BPosition to' effect that by
l')nnelelished b legitimate means._
roll''lf the
(.I)3nutw
to
,071 the question.principle of the measure is
hich
en' orrect, is not this a legitimatlef?teessien
Hear.) t be "i
cut" that opinion?—( .egitimat
fr cannot doubt that the House will eee
°ln fulap• not shrink
and not be deterred from, •
u▪
een„ eng its duty,
etz,shts,otTa principles on which the national defence
unit
° conducted.—(Cheers.)
‘./. GREY said the Noble Lord (J. Russell) had
steeinavtery much misunderstood, otherwise such eon-
re-,) 'a would-not have been put upon his wor sas had.
oep the cue. The Noble Lord had never uttered
eile-c°4 to the effect that the House were not entitledof to
)a.'ness their o• • at this or any other stage the.
"1. The pinion
titht t Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) had a perfect
to ° ask the House to join him in refusing to assent
lei " Bill of her Majesty's Government, and if be oho-.
Prenat:l„ a, majority then to assume the responsibilityf
tvas"ttlig such a Bill as the country wanted. But that_
Ise not the course adopted by the Noble Lord. He did
o,_Prepose to disagree with the recommendation of the
ohthateauttee that a Bill should be brought in and laid on
o But the Noble Lord said Government
Btll d obtain leave to bring in a Bill, but not the
the,, theY had prepared, but such a Bill as he thought
no .ht to bring in. He admitted Government had
inehnch Bill as the Noble Lord required; they had only
TO
mitts
Bill as had been recommended by the Committee.
:a Bill amendments might .be proposed in Com-
What 'lt was an unusual step not to meet the measure
e,oeasn direct negative, but to impose on Government the
eao4ltY of bringing in s Bill which they did not tip-
to h, °I. The Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) wished
be her
a force e • d trained, armed, and ready to
Bill called cl?lice oppe
into servn the shortest notice. W hen the
ever,. 48 in the hands of Members it would be found that
v'oulje °4°
of the matters wished for by the Noble Lord
*ell is accomplished. The Noble Lord objected to the
duty lo in the Bill. Government thought it their
antie when looking into the question of what was ne-
seretlisfen,the_detence of the country, to propose a mea-
ao irk should accomplish all the desired effects in the
ftellrEiepitelloettlee.„s4st burdensomevia
with the ordinary employments of
tall ee t"e• Government therefore thought it right to
"rhe,'`,4l tbe Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) to say
Cr be wished to have the militia regularly embo-
tzsti)ernblci(ttliyt suchen Act as would enable the Government
,obis e in caeca of war. Did the amendment of the
Ittlo Lord imply that he wished to have embodied mi-
Dostalt 01Ift so, that was an essential difference to the pro-
nletop,zait Governinent. He considered that such a
ut Into ' Would not only be unpopular in the country,
'pet tooreeseary under the circumstences, less efficient,
Ind ensue expensive. The Noble Lord asked why Ire-
tkatrane_Lt out? A great eal had been said abou
"eg the loyalty of Irdland. He could not be-
t