The Sun.
London, England, 1854-07-18 00:00:00

Government, they were bound to have made up their
mind in what manner they would amalgamate and con-
solidate the six different branches of our military force,
and the authorities by whom they were directed. Let him
remind the house that this was by no means a new sub-
ject, but one to which the attention of Government and Par-
liament had at different times been directed. The noble
lord had reminded them of the fact that so long ago as when
the Duke of Richmond held office in the Administration
of Earl Grey, a commission was appointed on this subject,
of which the noble lord was a member, and he adverted
also to the commission subsequently appointed in 1836, of
which Earl Grey, then Lord Howick, and. Secretary at
War, officiated at chairman, and of which the noble lord
as well as the noble viscount at the head of the Home de-
partment were members. That commission made a very
elaborate report in the year 1837, recommending that the
anomalous state of things to which he had adverted should
be abolished, that the Commander-in-Chief and Master-
General of the Ordnance should continue to discharge the
functions pertaining to the strictly military branch of
their offices, but that the civil duties of the various de-
partments should be consolidated, that the Secretary at
War should have a seat in the Cabinet as the responsible
minister in that house, though not a Secretary of State ;
and also, if he recollected rightly, that the commissariat
should be transferred to the new department, and taken
away from the Treasury. The noble lord hail told theni
that, in consequence of certain objections of the Duke of
Wellington, those recommendations were not carried out,
but he had not told them that he had been a member of
the commission, and, having concurred in its report, that
he now dissented from the recommendations then made.
Neither had the noble lord adverted to the fact, not unim-
portant as bearing on this question, that in the year 1850
a committee of that house was appointed to inquire into
the details of the army and ordnance expenditure, which
was selected with great care, and contained members most
competent to the discharge of their duties, the noble lord
the member for Totnes (Lord Seymour) being chairman.
They restated in their report the recommendations of the
committee of 1837, and declared their conviction that these
should be acted upon. Here was a third recent and com-
petent authority which recorded its opinion that the exist-
ing anomalies should be removed, and the inconveniences
of the present system corrected ; but to the report of that
committee the noble lord had made no reference whatever.
He certainly had felt very great surprise that with a war
hanging over us, with almost the certainty that as soon as
Parliament met we should find ourselves embarked in a
serious and too probably protracted contest, the Govern-
ment had not directed their attention to this subject dur-
ing the leisure of the recess, in order that they might be
prepared when Parliament met, to present a complete
scheme for the consolidation of the different departments
connected with the management of the army. After Par-
liament met, of course the unsatisfactory state of our
military administration became the subject of comment
in both houses. It was brought under the notice of the
other house by a noble earl, and was brought forward in
that house by the hon. member for Montrose. In that
debate, the right hon. gentleman the Secretary-at-War
made a speech contending that, in spite of the anamolies
complained of, the existing state of things ought to con-
tinue ; anti after quoting some opinions of Lord Grey, he
said :—" If Lord Grey thinks there is a time when no
alterations should be made ci fortiori, the present is a mo-
ment when, in my opinion at least, it would be dangerous
to make such a change as that proposed by my hon. friend"
—namely, that there should be a change in the management
of the army, and a consolidation of the different branches
of the service. "At any time, continued the right hon.
gentleman, "I think you ought to proceed step by step, but
at this moment I do not believe you could undertake a more
rash experiment than when you are about to enter on a seri-
ous contest, and when you will have the greatest pressure
on your energies and resources from being engaged in a hot
war." The noble lord (Lord J. Russell) also remarked,
" My right hon. friend has explained the great difficulty and
incon renience that would arise from attempting to carryinto
effect a new organisation of the departments at a moment
when they are all required to make the utmost exertions
in the preparation of the expedition now on its way to the
to the East. Instead of being a great public convenience,
I believe it would be a great public inconvenience, if the
carrying out of these arrangements were to be transferred
to any other department." In that debate it was an-
nounced that all the Government intended to do was, to
add a new secretary in the colonial department, consider-
ing the pressure of business. He confessed he yielded to
the force of the argument then used, and he thought the
prudent course of the Government was to go on with the
existing state of things, adding, however, another Under-
Secretary of State for the Colonial Department, until the
recess should enable them to address themselves to the
whole subject, with the view of laying some definite plan
before Parliament at the commencement of the next ses-
sion. It was, however, with some surprise that he learned,
during the Whitsuntide holidays, that the Government
had determined to establish a new department, with a
Secretary of State at the head of it. He thought that the
original opinions of the noble lord (Lord John Russell) on
this subject were wiser than those which he subsequently
adopted. It would have been far better, in his judgment,
if the noble lord had deferred, until this session was over;
any fresh arrangement. He thought that would have been
a better and a wiser plan than to come as he now did, with
an imperfect proposal, establishing a new department, and
a new Secretary of State, without having determined, ex-
cept in one single respect, what the duties of that new de-
partment and that new Secretary of State were to be.
(Hear.) He did not understand the noble lord to express
any decided opinion that the management of barracks and
fortifications was to be transferred to the new department,
or that the Government had made up its mind in any re-
spect as to what the duties of this new department were
to be, except that the commissariat was to be trans-
ferred to the new Secretary of State. But that which
must have struck the country most was, that which ap-
peared to him to be, at this moment, the anomalous posi-
tion of the Secretary at War. (Cheers from the Opposi-
tion.) The country must have been surprised to find that,
when the Government had so far matured their opinions
as to make up their minds to the creation of a new depart.
ment and a new Secretary of State, the Secretary at War
was to continue in existence at the head of an important
public department, and still to be a Cabinet Minister.
(Hear, hear.) What authority did the noble lord find for
that in any one of the reports to which he had referred ?
He (Sir John Pakington) knew of no recommendation
which had contemplated the simultaneous existence of a
War Minister in the Cabinet, and a Secretary of War in
the Cabinet. (Hear, hear.) That anomalous state of
affairs, he thought, was the strongest proof that could have
been afforded that the Government, from some motive or
other--he could not venture to say what the influence
might be—had changed their opinions, and their intended
mode of action. For some reason or other it seemed to
have been thought desirable to add a new Minister to the
Cabinet during the Whitsuntide recess; and now, to his
(Sir John Pakington's) extreme surprise, they were about
to vote this sum of money for the establishment of a new
department and a new Secretary of State, whose duties
were not defined, and whose duties it was clear the Go-
vernment themselves had not determined upon. (Hear,
hear.) He thought the house had great reason to feel dis-
satisfied with this most unsatisfactory state of things. Ho
thought they had a right to some explanation as to the
difference of the duties of the Secretary of State for War
and of the Secretary at War, both of them being Cabinet
Ministers ; and he should sit down in the hope that they
should have some explanation of what tho views of the
Government were, more satisfactory and more full than
that which had been afforded by the noble lord the Presi-
dent of the Council. (Cheers from the Opposition.)

Mr. S. HERBERT—I am afraid that that state of re-
gret, surprise, and astonishment in which the right hon.
baronet usually finds himself—(a laugh)—at a state of things
to which he cannot give his consent, will not be, and can-
not be, relieved by anything that I have to address to the
committee ; but I hope I shall be able to make clear to the
great body of the committee what are the intentions of the
Government, and to defend the course taken by the Go-
vernment, which has been so impugned by the right hon.
baronet. He is surprised that we, who so short a time ago
expressed opinions diametrically opposed to making any
change in the military departments, should now suddenly
propose to make a complete reconstruction of those depart-
ments. The right hon. baronet quoted from memory one
or two extracts from a speech that I had made on this
subject, in order to show that I at least had expressed an
opinion in favour of a perfect system. I think the com-
mittee will do me the justice to believe that at the time
when we before discussed this question there was no want
of frankness on my part in stating my opinions on the sub-
ject. I have held my present office in the Government on
two separate occasions, and having turned my attention' a
good deal to this subject, I thought it would not be imper-
tinent in me, though not speaking with the authority of
the Government, to give a general outline of what ap-
peared to me were the principal defects of the existing
system, and of the measures which seemed necessary to re-
medy those defects. Now, it is quite true that I had
spoken in reprobation of the arguments used for a con-
solidation of the military departments, grounded on the
misunderstandings which had arisen between the dif-
ferent military and civil officers at the commencement
of the present century. Now, a great deal of public
feeling has been excited upon this subject which is en-
tirely uncalled for. 'We have great difficulties to con-
tend with in dealing with these departments ; and I say,
let us apply ourselves to that task, but let us first get rid
of all those pre-Adamtite anecdotes—(a laugh)—in which
some are wont to indulge, but which are wholly foreign to
the purpose in hand. What I meant to intimate on that
occasion was this. I said, so far from their being now a
difficulty arising from any disagreement between the mili-
tary and civil departments, that had passed away ; but
that I was alive to the inconveniences of the present sys-
tem. The Commander-in-Chief has not that knowledge
of what in being done by the Ordnance department which
I think is exceedingly desirable For example, a fortifi-
cation may be made in any part of the island, and that
fortification when made, may be disapproved of by the
Commander-in-Chief. I think that is a great evil. You
have there the separate action of two departments of great
importance, uncontrolled by any superintending authority.
~,
"u may, however, consolidate departments, and they
may become inefficient from over-consolidation. I am not,
want
is,antieotnßroarathueerhththane
et
consnoZide
indeed, at all certain in respect to the efficiency of the
department that you are not suffering from over-
ohnesweriattoiofnit.
de-
partments, but one
make all of them supervising authority, with a view to
act in harmonious combination. (Cheers.)
I said at that time that of tfehdaitffyeroeunmt o"of our troops in the fieldt appeared to nee the provisioning
which has, practically, and at home by a department
but which has ay,no.hing at all to do with that sub-
ject,the cash supplies for ca greati deal to do with it in reference to
I think the department of en, was wrong in principle.
ment of check, but which is ntheA
reasury, which is a depart-
ment, should not be intrusted with
n administrative depart-
I suggested that the direction of the
a duty of that kind; and
removed from the Treasury to the mil.?;,:amissariat should. be
have expressed my opinion that the 0 adry departments.
di-
vided into two portions. It is now, irednance might be
di-
vided into two portions; for there is the civil
in a sense
the military department. They are governed and there is
man, but not in the same manner. There is, therefore,thesame
distinction between the two portions of the department a
the Ordnance; but whether the Commander-in-chie ofce
have the artillery and the engineers transferred to him is, I
think, a grave question for consideration. I have no doubt,
when we come to go further into this matter, we shall find
there are some sound and valid reasons for that opinion.
My own impression was that the Commander-in-Chief was
the proper person to have the direction and command of
the whole personnel of the army, including the artillery and
engineers, and that there should be left to the Ordnance
only the civil department, or that which dealt with the
great subjects of clothing, stores, and the like. That might
be open to misunderstanding; but that it should have been
misinterpreted by the right hon. baronet as being a com-
plete adhesion to the existing system, does, I confess, in-
spire me with some of those feelings of surprise with which
he appears on this occasion to be oppressed. (Hear.) The
right ho 4. baronet says the Government ought to h4ve,beela