The Sun.
London, England, 1854-12-19 00:00:00

He made it a sort of charge, in the first instance, that
we had heard little of the constitutional argument, as if
my noble friend was unable to make two speeches with
regard to the same bill, without feeling it necessary to
reproduce the same arguments ; and having complained
that my noble friend did not on this occasion lay any
stress upon that argument, the noble marquis pro-
ceeds to cast the whole power of his ridicule on a consti-
tutional argument and a constitutional objection, but cer-
tainly not on one like the argument and objection urged
by my noble friend. With regard to the constitutional
argument, my noble friend did lay great stress on a former
occasion upon the substitution of foreign troops in this
country, and their employment in this country, to the
exclusion of our own troops. It was to the employment
here of a foreign force that the constitutional argument
of my noble friend applied ; not that he apprehended
eight or ten thousand foreigners in this country would
make themselves masters of Britain. What my noble
friend said was, that it was contrary to the constitutional
pr"nciples upon which this country had proceeded, to
give to any Government power to employ foreign troops
at home I.i exclusion of the troops of the country itself.
If that constitutional doctrine be an absurdity, I hum-
bly beg that I may take my full share of the absurdity
which has been cast on my noble friend. I say in ex-
clusion of British troops, because it has been admitted
over and over again, that you do not embody the militia
now, in cmsequence of not having room to quarter them,
and yet you are to embody in the country, I presume
in barracks—but it would be more objec;ionable if bil-
leted—a large body of foreign troops fur the purpose of
training, and, as the bill states, "keeping up a perma-
nent depot," at least so long as this war lasts, and occu-
pying these barracks which are not sufficiently exten-
sive to accommodate your own troops. The argument
which my noble friend used with regard to " expedi-
ency" went against the adoption or incorporation in
the British army of these foreign troops at all. He was
first of all charged with having said that it was a degra-
dation to the British troops to fight by the side of
foreign troops. Nobody said any such thing. What
really occurred was this. A statement was made by a
noble friend of mine not now present, that it was a
humiliating and degrading idea to the people of this
country, that for the purpose of peace or war its own
soldiers were at the very outset of the war insufficient—
(hear, bear)—and I think it is a humiliation and degra-
dation to the country. (Hear.) Nobody said it was
a degradation to British troops to fight side by side of
foreign troops ; but if it be necessary to have these foreign
troops—if.we are to be subject to that humiliation—still
there was no occasion for this bill for the purpose of rais-
ing them. The necessity arising for the bill is that you
must drill and train these troops in England, and this
necessity especially arises from the fact that you are
about to let in foreign troops without the consent and
authority of their own Sovereigns—to pick up the refive
from all quarters of the globe. The noble marquis says,
that for many of our celebrated victories we have been
indebted to the co-operation of foreign troops. I ad-
mit it ; but it the noble lord will follow out his historical
investigation, he will find that, in almost every instance,
the troops F o co-operatingavere either fighting under the
banners, and with the sanction of their respective Sove-
reigns, or they were fighting in a national cause. At the
battle of Minden we might be considered not so much
the principals as the auxiliaries. It was fought much
more for the German than the English cause. But
this is not the case with a body of mercenaries, not act-
ing under the control of their Sovereigns, but merely
paid with your money. My lords, with regard to such
troops, I agree with my noble friend, they are not the
materials I should like to put by the side of the British
army. The noble marquis tells us that he was long ago
persuaded that this was about to be a great war ; I wish
he had impressed that feeling upon his colleagues. My
noble friend does not complain of your disciplining fo-
reign troops, but of training them in this country, and
employing them without any sanction of their own so-
vereigne. No doubt the Duke of Wellingtcn employed
Portuguese and Spaniards during the Peninsular war,
but could any one say those troops were not acting in
their own national cause ? Two objections have been
raised to this bill ; one is, that it is an unconstitutional
principle to admit of the continued residence, drilling,
and training of organised foreign bodies in this country
with a view to their permanently remaining here ; the
second is, that as a matter of expense it is unwise to in-
troduce these foreign troops. First, from the manner
in which it is proposed to raise them, we can have no
just confidence that they will not betray the trust re-
posed in them ; and next, because for the paltry purpose
of obtaining ten, or fifteen, or twenty thousand German
troops, you make a declaration in the face of Parliament
and of the country that cannot but give the greatest dis-
couragement to those efforts which would be made with-
out stint by your own country, if you did not discourage
their coming forward in the manner they propose to do.
We have not heard from my friend the Commander in-
Chief in what respect he conceives it is necessary to intro-
duce a difference in regard to punishments in the prac-
tice here from the practice in India. The English army
is subject to corporal punishment, and yet it is proposed
that these German troops shall not be subject to the
same corp Oral punishment. I think there ought not to
be any distinction of that kind drawn. I would
ask whether you might not, for the purposes of
this war, advantageously use any of the native
force in India ? If troops not strictly English are
necessary, those soldiers are at the present time most
available.; nor do I think that there could be any solid
objection to the introduction of the Indian native troops,
in conjunction with the English troops, to the battle-
fields of Russia. From that quarter you might derive
aid without delay. But I wish to ask whether, in the
prosecution of this war, we are to look for men or money
from our colonial possessions? I saw that the Le-
gislat ire of Canada voted a sum of 20,0001. to be
applied towards the amelioration of the hardships
suffered by our armies in the present war. I re-
joiced to see this, and hailed it as an indication
of friendly feeling and sympathy towards us. But
your lordships will see that it was only given as
a mark of sympathy. This is obviously the case ; for
the 20,0001. was to be applied in equal parts between
our armies and the armies of our ally the French. Ido
not complain of this—far otherwise ; but I recall it to
your lordships' recollections that you may see that-the
gift was made simply out of sympathy, and was in itself
no mark of the allegiance of Canada. It was a mark of
sympathy to the cause, hut not of sympathy to the coun-
try. The North Atnericaa provinces now are in every
respect as independent of this country as Ireland was
previous to the Union. Tney are, it is true, under the
same Sovereign as this country, but their affairs are con-
ducted by Administrations of their own, under respon-
sible Governments. They are not habie to contribute
towards the payment of the debts of this country, nor
are they subject to its laws, but are left to their own
local government. They enjoy the same independence
as Ireland did at the time I have referred to. But was
there ever a war engaged in by this country towards the-
prosecution of which, in conjunction with England, Ire-
land was not ready to contribute both her money and
her men ? (Hear.) Now, with regard to many of the
colonies, I atn willing to admit that the scarcity of their
population, and the nature of their employment, might
prevent them contributing in men largely towards the
maintenance of the war. But this does not apply to the
British colonies of North America. They are at the
present time in a state of great prosperity and wealth,
and with an ever-absorbing population ; and I believe
that towards the carrying on this war the North
American colonies would, if requested, readily contri-
bute without payment, if 'necessary; but if you have
the money ready, then, I believe, with payment, you
would be able to raise immediately in those colonies a
certain amount of force to be officered by persons now
resident in Canada, and then added to the British army,
not as a local contingent, for that would be in accord-
ance with a system which I do not approve of, but as
part of the British army. I verily believe that nothing
would gratify the North American colonies more than
to be allowed to raise, say, three or four regiments, to
be in every respect placed upon the same footing as the
British army, subject to this difference, that the periods
of service which are now assigned to the British army to
be passed in this country should, in their case, be so
altered that it should be passed in their own country—
such service being considered as home service, whilst
their service in this country should be considered as
foreign service. In ail other respects these North Ameri-
can i egiments would be on the footing of other regiments
of the British army. I throw this outfor the conside
ration of her Majesty's Government, and I must say
that, looking to the position of these colonies, looking
to the prosperity and privileges they enjoy, their immu-
nity from contribution towards the debts of this country,
and the obligations they are under to this country, it
does not appear too much to me to ask that they should
be ready to testify their allegiance to our Sovereign in
joining us in carrying on a war, one effect of whioh may
eventually be to render necessary the defence of those
colonies as part of the British empire. (Hear, hear.) I
believe they would be rejoiced to supply troops to.
be considered as representing and forming a portion
of the British army ; and such an addition to our forces
would not be, and could not be, considered by any one
as being an addition of foreigners to our army. I have
only thrown this suggestion out for the consideration of
her Majesty's Government ; and with regard to the bill
itself now before the house, I have only to say that,
retaining all my objections to the bill, notwithstanding
the speech of the noble marquis opposite, I shall confine
my further opposition to saying " no" to its third read-
ing, in case it goes to a division. I shall not, how-
ever, divide the house upon it, as your lordships have
already, though by a narrow majority, approved of the
principle of the bill—and the principle is all that there
is in the bill.

After a few words in explanation from the Marquis of
LANSDOWNE,
The bill was then read a third time, and passed.
ADJOURNMENT FOR THE RECESS.
In reply to a question put by the Earl of MALMESBURY,
The Earl of ABERDEEN said that the house, at its
would adjourn to the 23d
rising for the Christmas recess,
of January.
Their
adjourned to lordshipthis day.s then, at ten minutes past eight o'clock,

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
THE MILITIA.
On clause 2,
Col. SIBTHORP called attention to the circumstance
that the bounty to be given to volunteers was not fixed by
the bill, and that the period of service was too undefined,
being for the remainder of the war, or six months after
its termination. He believed it would be far better to fix
the bounty at once, and also to fix some period for the pro-
bable length of service required.
Mr. S. HgRBERT said it was the business of the Sec-
retary at War to fix the amount of the bounty, which
could not be fixed by Act of Parliament, as it varied ac-
cording to the circumstances under which the men were
enlisted.
Mr. DISRAELI reminded the honourable gentleman
that, in the year 1814, the bounty was fixed by Act of
Utiarilant.