The Sun.
London, England, 1852-05-11 00:00:00

8 IT N,

Bill, resuming
80,000 men.
ane moved that the Chairman THE MILITIA.
The House. then wont into Committee on the Militia
he hoped
'lining at clause 7
the Mr,giri,l-TwhViicE4 said this clause contained the essence of
qumestion should berireetse.awd.
r. WALPOLE
Believing
the creation of a reserved force of
that the money would be wasted,
the
house
should report progress;
reasonable. The Bill had theo
sear.red to a new Parliament.
onbelednargepreeeatweditlyh him that this
e
hoped therefore the d
under these circumstances,
pnroopnoesition was not very
the clause.
the guide to another.aoseec"len et n
en
tcases m
awouldde th e othero
take
a kb ee
would,EhfleT said, theP°tZ
inadtooothe Chancellor of the
the
mlsrreinllßs
eRUOIrGt
eSecwreatsanry(:)t
unexpected,
the case. The
altogether al-
division that
Exchequer, respecting these 80,
night by the Hom
tered the circumstances of
had just taken place tedhe
lieved, unsought by the Government 1,;(7, he be-
to a division with one speech on each bi,_. (Hue came
circumstance was unprecedented. A umajoritye Such a
had pronounced against the Government. This provede9
that the Goverum nt did not €l.ljoy the confidenceof tCe
House of Commons. The Right Hon. Home Secretary
said this ws,s a ditT:)rent question, and that majorities of
the House had expressed their assent to the principle.
It was a different question, but be denied that the majo-
rities were on the principle of the Bill. questio
of
n of
such great importance, involving an Papend
men, for
e
three-quarters of a million of money, and 80,000
martial purposes, with the ballot in perspecishould
not be decided in a dislocated Parliament like the pre-
sent. Referring to the speech of Lord Derby at the
Mansion-house, he (Mr. Bright) considered it alto-
gether a peace speech; and the *tech of the French
Ambassader, speaking not only for his own Govern
meat, but for the whole corps diplomatique, was a most
sattsractGry assurance that nut only was there no ques-
tion in dispute with France and other countries but
there was, i
, n fact, perfect amity. If those distinguished
men could be believed,
Government what should thought of the
for urging forward be
—a measure of dangerousa character then any
ttaidr,g by the Government 1815. The course now
to produce the result which they one the best calculated
One of the Ministers of the. Frenchthey professed to avoid.
to an English gentleman in Paris President had stated
calculated to excite ill-feeling in that nothing was more
cussionsenow.g,oiDg
on .rc, g . France than the die-
). rsrlisment and in this country

on the subject of f:his BM. The same Minister had pre-
vented by his own power the insertion of extracts from
such speeches, fer toe purpose of preventing 'heat in
the mind of the French people on the sat-jeer, lender
these circumstarmes he thought the Committed ,ebould
not ee asked to divide cm tee clause; hut then- after the.
division to-night, the Bill should at least he postponed
for a few days until it should be reconsidered by the
Cabinet, if it was not postponed until the assembling of
the new Parliament.
Mr. J. BELL agreed with the Hon. Member that the
circumstances of the case had changed since the intro-
duction of this Bill. There had been positive evidence
since then of the fallacy of the fears that had prevailed.
If the French President desired to invade this country,
he would have taken advantage of the period when this
country was left without a Government. ,Ele hoped,
therefore, the House would, accede to the proposition of
the Hon. Member for Manchester.
Mr. FOX said there was one remarkable change since
the introduction of the Bill. It had been stated that
two successive Governments had given. their assent to
the measure, leading to the inference that they were in
possession' of private information; but the Noble Lord
at the head of the- late Government had declared his
conviction that there was no immediate or urgent dan-
ger—(" Hear" from Lard J.' Russell)—while the pre-
sent Government had postponed the urgent principle of
the Bill—namely] the ballott--to the close of the year.
The inevitable Conclusion was, therefore, that no dan-
ger existed, and that there could be no public wrong
in postponing the measure until the next Parliament.
He (Mr. Fox) was of opinion that this measure was the
puled° of a change of policy ns respected the foreign
relations of this country, and -for making it more of a
military power. It was, therefore, a , measure which
should not be entertained by a moribunal Parliament.
The country would regard as an ominous conjunction
the revival of 'protection and of a military force, in the
nature of an army of reserve. Oa grounds of prudence
her Majesty's Government would do well to have this
Bill postponed.
Mr. WALPOLE declined to enter on the general ar-
gument, not from any disrespect to. the Hon. Member
for Manchester, but because the principle of the mea-
sure had been frequently discussed. The clause before
the Committee had been debated during two nights, and
there had been More than one division upon it. Under
these circumstances, he thought the Committee • could
take no other course thin that of proceeding with it;
and the Hon. Member for Montrose would see that
there was no ground, therefore, for his motion. The
Hon. Member for Oldham would, however, remember
that the urgency of the measure was declared by him
(Mr. Walpole) not to be the ballot, but, voluntary en-
listment. He hoped the House would, therefore,. go on
with the clause, which had been twice before discussed,
and on which there had been three divisions, --.
Mr. HUME only wished that Parliarneutewould not
enter on such a large expenditure as 80,000 men in-
volved at the present moment, but deferit tintirefter the
general election. ,
Mr. FORBBS could not see what an addition to the
Parliamentary representation had to do with the de-
fence of the country. He might be wrong as to the
nature of the danger, but he certeinly did -think there
was ell the less of it when the century was prepared.
He could not understand the objection of Hun. Gentle-
men opposite to the militia, when be Considered their
antagonism to standing armies. The militia was con-
stituted on a far better footing than the National Guard
of France, or the militia of America. :.0e,(112r. Forbes)
would rather pay taxes _than have contributions levied
on him, either directly by -foreign bayonets, or indi-
rectly in the form of a forced loan. He would not be a
paver to defeating the Bill in any shape whatever, be-
cause he believed it to be absolutely necessary.
Mr. WAICLEY thought the discussion of this Bill
Should be persisted in until her- Majeaty'e•Government
were convinced of its inappropriateness. The vote of
that night had changed the circumstances; the Govern-
ment bad sustained a defeat, on a strictly. Government
tarsi,
neoit
conduct
nta
natnhndyec:coe
constitutional
existed
onesfif tdiete:
each an
fnaoanafl
measure. In a House of 382 Members the Government
were abst-lately in a minority, of:86. He
.would ask every
ctGhooenvsetHirtuolntsieoonn, ahec,lwiniLlgeernshobteoptroutirwt:phhalie,s7tewfilitlytighw:
important Bid. Ito woudld athskatthtehnChparneceeeldleonrtofetnhueldExhe-
einniethat case it was the duty of the
precedent?fo tte rif
dell,
le,
He
oheue dd,
people's representatives to discuss the principle of the
Bill. The Bill was dreaded and abhorred by the people.
Was it a Bill which the minority ought to allow to pass?
He did not care about being charged with acting with a
factious party in obstructing this measure; he was satis-
fied with tee consciousness ot meaning to do his duty
to his country honestly and fairly. When the Bill
was first introduced by the Noble Lord (Lord J. Rus-
sell) he had implored the Noble Lord to show any suffi-
cient reason for such a Bill. He had heard no reason
stated. The Right lion. Gentleman opposite had also
assigned no reason why this Bill was more needed in
1852 than in 1842. the
was for peace all over the world;
but it appeared to be' the wish of the supporters and
framers of the Bill to produce as many provocatives to
wor as possible. As far as France was concerned, he
saw no symptoms of a warlike character. The French
had had enough cf disturbance; they apparently wanted
nothing now but peace, and he believed the present ge-
neration of French people would not be anxious to go to
war. Such a Bill as the one before the House ought to
be obstructed, and defeated if possible, by every mode
which the forms of the House would admit of. The
Government ought not to press forward the Bill this
session; but if they did force the Bill through Parlia-
ment by the aid of a tyrannical majority, then, he be-
lieved, they would not very much like what would be
said at the hustings of their conduct.
Mr. WALPOLE—The Hon. Gentleman had com-
menced his speech by saying that Government were in a
minority, and a Government in a minority ought not to
advise the Crown to raise 50,000 men for defensive pur-
poses; and he concluded his speech by telling Govern-
ment they ought not to go on with a tyrannical majority
against the eishes of the people, who, he believed, were
decidedly against the Bill. Now, if it be a fact that Go-
vernment were in a majority, and that the House, by a
majority, had confirmed the principle of the Bill, was it
not right that the Bill should be proceeded with?—
(Heal., hear.) The HouSe were agreed upon the princi-
ple of the. Bill, and they were now called upon to con-
sider the details. The Hon. Member might show that
the principle of the Bill was bad, bat that principle
having been affirmed, he would not discuss it then. If
the Hon. Member was right in his argument, the proper
time would be to discuss the principle at the third reading.
Mr. B. ELLIS well knew the effect that the former
Militia Bill had on the rural population. He was satis-
fied the proposed " army of reserve" would produce simi-
lar effects when the term of enrolment expired. They
would return to their homes and former occupations to
deprave and demoralise the population.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said the Hon. Memb tide Mr.
Wakley) had spoken of the division against Go-
vernmeat. The persons, he believed, who were most
surprised at that division were those who supported the
amendment. A great number of Members had left the
House, not anticipating a division. It was with the
greatest difficulty he got into the House in time to give
his vote,
in a state of consternation because they could not get in.
and there were several Members in the lobby
He deeply lamented the division. He thought the proposi-
tion of Gov, rnment was perfectly fair and liberal, and he
would tell Hon. Members who had professed liberal po-
litics that they could not have taken a more unpopular
mode than that of voting against the Government mea-
sure. It was said by Hen. Gentlemen opposite that
they must not pass measures of importance in a mori-
bund Parliament, but by their acts they desired to pro-
vide an incomplete Parliament to carry important mea-
sures. Hon. Members opposite argued that the votes
of Members representing large constituencies ought to
tell for more than one vote each. Ali their argument
turned against them—because by the recent division
they declared that the representation should not be more
equally distributed.—(Hear, hear.) Now with re-
spect to the militia measure, the Honourable Member
(ilr. Ellis) said he objected to it because of the grievous
moral effects it would produce on the population. The
Hon. Member said he remembered the consequences
which resulted from the last local militia. This Bill,
however, was not intended to be a local Militia Bill.
But it appeared there were special circumstances which
Made the Hon. Member abhor both a militia or an army.
Those reasons were doubtless very creditable to the Hon.
Gentleman; he deprecates a resort to tams, be deprecates
military power altogether, and of course he deprecates a
militia. Bet on account of those special reasons the.
lion. Member was not at liberty to give an .unbiassed
opinion. The Hon. Member came to the discussion with
a foregone conclusion. And though the Hon. Member
was justly entitled to give an opinion, still that opinion
must stand singly.—(bear, bear.) With respect to
dividing the House, he trusted they would not have
another snap division—(Haar, hear)—like what had just
taken place. He trusted the House would not permit
the principle of the Bill to be mutilated in Committee,
which they had already sanctioned. The principle had
over and over again been confirmed; it was vain, there-
fore, to expect to defeat the measure—it could only be
uselessly obstructed.
Mr. ROEBUCK would just look at the recent divi-
sion, so that the House might understand the fact. The
numbers were 234 for, 184 against; the pairs were 80—
and these together made a total of 462 Members. Now,
462 was a large portion of that House, though it had
been said many went away not expecting a division;
that argument might operate on both sides—so that there
was an end of the Hon. Gentleman's snap division.
The fact was, that the Hon. Gentleman knew the ma-
jority of that House was against the Government on
t hat
that
tqhuee
presentstion. The
Governmentopinion
gt
hh et
sHi
mo up sl
ye wt
oa sp,l
sasnd tis,
those
the Militi:upßarlie,lcl
country;
necessary for the good government of the
itarliamestattotodeafnereanldl oHtheerremadeadsyuresesk,naotwilet(oigebdritnhgatthone
heßut
e. netpderateao how that was. First, the Administra-
swtaosodb),Oalltindd by
au Administra-
tion
aeduamded.a.jatOhreli
at
present
of the House was against him.
Lord had since brokenl ees eportionGovernment
of
their
introducedsupporters
votes they gave. But the Noble
was
against
aoose from his fetters (we under-
wasmaillitia Bill, or at least this
the
portion of the House,
Militia,. Bill. There
representing a large sectionargoef population,
They
were
nwhoow
were strongly against all Militia Bite
the recent
avdodter,ehsysinwgh?ohovtehrenimr emntiuoinritycownasesqusnce of
brought
you to view.' And they said,
in-
tended to do? Do just enough
Why.
ton 0
_carrytdo remarkably
wna ;what you
business until you can go-fairly before the constituences,
the
public
and when you get another Parliament, do what
con-
stitutional Government ought to doe's:es
klleaart
Supposing Government were in a majority on this Bit!a.
they would still be crippled; for they who were in a
mi-
nority would turn round and say, " Any Government
'beaten as you are, at a constitutional Government,
ought to resign.' It was clear Government could not
escape from the difficulty, except on the principle that
they would appeal to the country. If Government told
• •

Mr. REYNOLDS thought the Hon. Member for
Sheffield had explained the division satisfactorily, and
had shown that 462 Members was ajarge portion of that
House. He would account for the opposition be in-
tended to offer to the Bill. He had been told if the clause
were rejected, it would endanger the Bill; that was a
strong inducement for him to endeavour to get that
clause rejected. The Hon. and Learned Gentleinals (Mr.
Whiteside) had been very eloquent in the laudatiori of a
militia. Wby, then, did the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man not extend the benefit to Ireland? Why should
England have a militia and not Ireland? He. had
always heard, at least from cooks, that what was
sauce for the goose was sauce for the gander; but
here all the sauce was given to the goose, and none to
the gander—(Laughter.) Ireland, hoWever, though left
out of the Bill, was included in the more important part
of it—for Ireland would have to pay her share 'of the
burden—(Hear', hear.) The Hon. Gentleman' here re-,
ferred to the Kafir war, and _adverted' to the item in
the Budget of 600,000/. for the 'expense of that War.
He had lately asket, a friend who had just returned from
Kafirland what notions the Kafirs entertained of Chris-
tianity. His reply was, that one part of the Kafirs con-
sidered Christianity meant brandy and tobacco, for it was
through the agency of brandy and tobacco that conver-
sions were attempted to be made. Another part of the
Kafirs considered that. Christianity meant burning corn,
stealing of cattle, abasing women, and slaughtering one
another. Now he would ask the House, was it not time
to put an end
_to all this bloodshed and expense? He
contended that a Militia Bill was not needed,
and that Government were not justified in inflicting
it on the country. He thought the bounty
would be a - premium on emigration to America.
The 'aten were to be drilled for twenty-one days, and
then to be set at liberty to go where they liked. That
was called providing for the defence of the conntry.
He might rerer 'the Committee to the authority of Paley
for the reasons why that celebrated philesopher•thought
it regular military force preferable to a militia for the
defence of the country. He hid not heard a siegle ar-
gument from Hon. Members .opposite in fayour of the
Bill. It the, pub\ie prints were to be believed, no one
could apprehend any danger from Franco. The Presi-
dent seemed to be occupied in cousclidating his power,
in promoting sphemes for the improvement of France by
railroads, drainage, education, and other peaceful works,
and in breaking down that terrible band'of men, the
leaders of the Red Republicans. It was 'quite true that
the present Bill had been supported by large majorities,
but majorities were not always in the right; and it
ought not to be forgotten that there were many lieute-
nants of counties in that House who would have a great
deal of patronage under the Bill, if it became law. He
thought the Bill unwarranted and uncalled-for.
Mr. SANDARS said be had voted for the second
reading of the Bill—though he did not approve of all its
details—and he had done so on the ground that addie
tional defences were necessary. His impreision had
been that the best mode of providing that defence wonld
have been by an addition to the regular army and
voluntary corps; but the speech of the Noble Lord the
Member for Tiverton had convinced him that the best
mode would be the means proposed by the present mea-
sure. He did not at all approve of the compulsory
clauses, anil he had to suggest toshe Right Hon. Gen-
tleman the Secretary for the Home Department whether
it would not be advisable to get rid of these clatises. He
felt satisfied that it would be impossible to carry into
effect these clauses in the part of the country ho came
from (the West Riding), and would recommend their
withdrawal.
Mr. MO WATT said that without the compulsory
clauses there would be no means of ensuring any force
at all. He was one of those who thought that our de-
fences were not in a satisfactory state, and that wo
were not sufficiently protected against probable danger.
Far years he had entertained—he might almost say
the conviction—that this country was exposed to the
risks of aggressions of a wariike character, and that
these were risks which
Ought not to be allowed to
hang over them. in the course
of the debate many
military authorities had been referred
to, but he had not
heard any one assert that these authorities
could not provide for the defec e
t ° militaryf
hec country if the
expenditure of the 16,000,0001., voted for military pur-
poses were left to them uncontrolled
consi-
derations. His justification in voting against the present
Bill was the manner in which our rular forces were
distributed iu different parts of
our extremities,of the world.
and to
We seemed
to dietribbte our forces a
leave ourselves exposed to a home thrust at our heart.
An additional reason why ht,voted against the measure
was his opinion that the Government were not
present the persOns to bring forward this measure, more espe-
cially after such a defeat
as they had that night sus-
tained.
After a few words from Mr.
and Mr. G. Thompson against the Bill,
The Committee then divided, Crawford, Mr. Brown,
when
there appeared--
For reporting progress
85
Against it ••• •••
Majorityls6
against
gallery the motion —7l
On our return to thewe efound
Mr. HUME inovingehe omission of the clause, and
complaining of the contrast Which the conduct of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer and of his party on chat
occasion presented to the "coursepursued
on the Opposition benches which they had
The CttANCELLOR of
the Hon. Gentleman had
athe EXCHEQUER said
of the Exchequer) had statedf that he (the Chancellor
Former occasions always been
f
ready to oppose every pro
public money. But that 13 61tion for the expenditure of
public the honour, and wetthe not so; for wherever the
security of the country were
involved, he had never op
diture.—(Cheers.) As 11°8ed propositions for expen-
grants of public money to was not prepared to oppose
public creditor, so he seu Pay the dividends to the
disbursement of public move prepared to oppose any
country.—(Hear, hear.). a for the defence of the
on the clause,' which had be would say nothing more
two nights. He believed that under discussion during
tre ' d was a declaration of vtthat the public then re-
qurepreaeatatives.—(Cheers.) opinion by the votes of their
Mr. HUME said that the honour and the interests'of
the country were not at btahe
O
Right Hon. Gentleman had ntt that occasion. The
fBrly failed to establish
any such-position--(Laughter, e.ad cries of •' Oh, oh")
—and it was on that ground
that
he (Me.llume) opposed
the measure. He would be one of
the first to support
any proposal which was based on
h
main-
taining the public credit. But the measure
necessity of
measure before them
was only a means of endangering
that credit.—(llear,
hear.) All profligate Governments exhausted the public
resources by unnecessary expeadite,e.—
(Laughter, and
general marks of disapprobation on the Ministerial
benches.) If Hon. Gentlemen opposite
way he should be obliged to move agaite went on in that
man should leave the chair, because hne, that the Chair-
bullied.—(lelear, hear, and laughter.)lf ndt to be
he were told
that he was anxious to destroy the public credit, he
should throw back the charge. He believed he had done
as much as any man to preserve the public
credit—
(Hear, hear)—and their credit would not perhaps .
be in
the state in which it was if he had not •
interfered.—(A
laugh.) Those who knew nothing at all about the matter
were laughing, but he pardoned them, He did not
want to quarrel with the Chancellor of the Exchequer;
he wanted to keep his coffers full. He was ashamed of
the course pursued in that matter by many y Members
with whom he bad long been in the habit of voting;
but Whigs and Tories had agreed on that occasion to
waste the public money money. He would divide the
Committee against the proposal to enrol and keep up
BQ,OOO additional men as part of the permanent armed
force of this country.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause ••• ••• ••• 169
Against it ... ••• ••• ••• 82
Majority for the clause „. —B7
The clause was then ordered to stand part of the Bill.
On chute 8, which empowers the Queen-in Council to
fix the quotas in the different counties from which the
force is to be drawn,
Mr. M. GIBSON asked for information as to who
were strictly liable to serve. He understood that any
poor man with more than one child could claim ex-
emption.
Mr. WALPOLE said that exemption would be
claimed under the 42d of George lIL The words of this
clause were in conformity with that Act.
Mr. COBDEN doubted if gentlemen were at all ac-
quainted with' the provisions of the Act in question.
Mr. WALPOLE said that this clause provided for the
contingency of the voluntary enlistment not producing
the requisite number of men. If the ballot were put
into operation every person of a certain age and height
would be liable to serve, and exemption would be claimed
under the statute to which he referred.
Mr- M. GIBSON thought it would be well to post-
pone this clause until the compulsory clauses came under
consideration.
Mr. WALPOtE said the.ce was nothing in the clause