The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-01 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JUNE 1, r 1860.

in the colonists than their arms were turned against our-
selves. In the other case it was palpably absurd to call the
Greek colonies, colonies in one sense of the term Syra was
in fact, no more a colony of Corinth than England was of
Saxony. He believed that the adoption of Mr. Godley's
proposals would very seriously tend to undermine our great
colonial empire. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. C. FORTESC UE entirely concurred with almost
everything that had fallen from the noble lord, but he was
sorry the subject should have been introduced in this in-
formal manner. He particularly regretted the absence of
the right honourable baronet who had lately held ' the
office of Colonial Secretary (Sir G. B. Lytton), for he
was satisfied that his opinions would have been very
different from those of the right hon. gentleman opposite.
The right hon. gentleman asked what course the govern-
ment intended to take with regard to the report. It must
not be forgotten that there were virtually two reports,
which were incompatible with each other. The first of
those documents was a very able one, but its practical
utility was somewhat doubtful. It would have been better,
in his opinion, if the gallant gentleman had not fettered
the committee by his instructions, but he was bound to say
that they seemed to have entirely forgotten what those in-
structions were ; because, instead of laying down a scheme
for each colony, they had merely recommended one simple,
rigid, uniform rule, to be applied indiscriminately to every
case without regard to its particular circumstances. Mr.
Godley, in the first place, proposed to give to each colony
the initiative responsibility and management of its mili-
tary defences, and he suggested that the inhabitants should
contribute to those defences in a certain definite and fixed
proportion, without reference to the poverty, the wealth,
the danger, or the necessity of any particular settlement.
Such a scheme he (Mr. Fortescue) felt convinced would
not be practicable. The fact that the question of peace or
war was not in the hands of the colonists rendered it in-
cumbent upon the imperial government to treat them with
consideration, and to go to some expense for their protec-
tion. A great part of the right hon. gentleman's speech
was devoted to the question whether it was worth our
while to keep our colonies ; but being of opinion that
it was the business of the Colonial-office to preserve
them, he would not follow tho right hon. gentleman
the arguments he had offered on the subject. (Hoar,
hear.) It was a mistake, however, to suppose that the
chief risk which the colonies ran lay in the danger
to which they would be exposed in the event of a great
European war ; it was to be found rather in the hos-
tility of formidable native tribes. (Hear, hear.) No
doubt a great deal of expense had been incurred at the
Cape, but at all events the colony had been saved the hor-
rors of another Kaffir war. It was the dangerous combi-
nation of races under cne government, such as existed in
the 'West India Islands, the Mauritius, and Ceylon, which
required for the preservation of public safety the mainte-
nance of a considerable force. Considering their means of
defence, and their possible dangers, the colonies ought to
endeavour to do all in their power for themselves, and at
the least expense of imperial troops. The military spirit
was rapidly rising in Australia. (Hear, hear.) Those
colonies stood least in need of imperial troops, being com-
pletely isolated from other countries. Still he should be
sorry to see them left without a certain number of English
red coats, at least sufficient to constitute a guard for the
government. The recommendation of the report that a
uniform proportion of imperial troops should be supported
in each oolony was not practicable ; for in many cases they
would have to reject some portions of the voluntary aid
furnished by the colonists themselves. (Hear.) The go-
vernment would use their best endeavours to reduce the
military expenditure in the colonies, where it could be
done; but they would not undertake the responsibility of
carrying out such a rigid and uniform scheme as was re-
commended in the report.
Mr. A. MILLS thought that the subject was a proper
one for the consideration of a select committee. The report
expressed some very 'valuable opinions ; but he rather con-
curred in the dissentient views expressed by Mr. Elliot.
It was most desirable that some means should be adopted
of proportioning imperial to colonial expenditure in the
different colonies. As the estimates were now framed it
was difficult to ascertain, in many cases, what proportion
of expenditure was really made in respect of the colonies.
The expenditure on the colonies was much exaggerated.
He did not recommend that we should take lessons from
France ; but he found that the cost to the country of
Algeria was as much as the cost of the whole of the
British colonies. 'We made a large colonial expenditure
under the head of fortifications, especially in North
America. But what was the value of the fortifications
of Quebec, unless in the event of an attack by
the United States, which, to be successful, must be favoured
by the colonists themselves ?—and of what value would the
fortifications then be? In such a state of things the con-
nection of the mother-country with that colony would be
severed at once. He should be glad to see the estimates
prepared in a more distinct manner, so as to show the exact
amount of colonial expenditure.
PENSIONS OF NON-COMMISSIONED OFFICERS
AND SOLDIE RS.
Gen. UPTON asked if it was the intention of the Go-
vernment to recommend a revision of the warrant of the Ist
July, 1848, with a view to its improvement, and especially
to increase the rates of pension of non-commissioned officers
and soldiers discharged the service in a helpless condition ?
At present these pensions were miserably low. Those who
had beef in the army less than ten years were only allowed
a temporary pension of 6d. a day for 18 months ; if above
ten years, the same amount was allowed for two years ; and
if they had served 14 years, for three years. The only re •
maining point to which he would allude was the very in-
sufficient pension granted for total blindness. It was only
from 9d. to ls., which he considered to be totally inadequate.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS said many attempts had been made
to convince the public that we had not a sufficient force for
the internal defence of the country. It appeared, however,
that of the 145,000 men proposed to be voted, 105,000 were
to be stationed at home. In addition we had depots of regi •
ments in India, 15,000 ; marines on shore, 6,000 ; enrolled
pensioners, 15,000 ; embodied militia, 23,700 ; disembodied
militia, 44,300 ; yeomanry cavalry, 15,000 ; Irish constabu-
lary, 12,000 ; rifle volunteers, 100,000. We had thus a total
force of 336,000 men—sufficient, certainly, to repel any in-
vader, no matter how powerful he might be. A great deal
had been said of our colonies. It appeared from a recent return
that their military defence cost us £3,590,000 per annum, in
addition to which we had to pay a considerable sum for
colonial bishops and magistrates, making the total expen-
diture £4,877,000. Other countries managed things differ
ently. The Dutch colonists not only maintained them-
selves, but remitted £2,600,000 a year to the Home Govern-
ment, while the Spanish colonists remitted £1,150,000 to
Madrid, after paying all their own expenses. Yet we were
taxed to the amount of £4,877,000 for our colon:es. Party
struggles very often took place between the front Opposi-
tion and the Treasury benches, but he noticed that when-
ever the public money was to be voted away there was never
any difference between them. (Hear.) The estimates
showed an amount of extravagance never equalled in this
country in times of peace ; but the gallant general opposite
stood up to defend them, and the Secretary for 'War was no
doubt glad to have such powerful assistance. Looking at
the expenditure of the country when Sir R. Peel and the
Duke of 'Wellington were at the head of affairs, and con-
trasting this, or even the expenditure. in 1852, with the enor-
mous sums now asked for, he was astonished at the extra-
vagance which now prevailed. (Hear.) The Guards, com-
prising 6,300 men and 261 officers, cost in pay a10ne£206,300.
On the other hand, six regiments of the Line, containing 123
men more, but only 228 officers, cost less by £42,840, and in
clothing cost less by X 11,470, making altogether a saving of
£54,310 as between the Line and the Guards. He regarded
such a difference as inexplicable and unnecessary.
Col. KNOX asked the right hon. gentleman to state the
course which he intended to pursue with regard to the pur-
chase system. He had been understood to say that the pur-
chase system should cease at the rank of major, and that
from that point promotion should be by selection. Now,
the real fact was that selection meant jobbery. (Hear.) No-
thing was more invidious than that an officer should rise to
the rank of major, and then find himself with no guarantee
that ho or his interests would afterwards be in any way
protected.
Sir C. NAPIER, in answer to the hon. member for
Lambeth (who asked what made it necessary to spend so
much more money now for the army than during the Go-
vernment of the Duke of Wellington and Sir It. Peel), ob-
served that at that time there was not a Napoleon Bona-
parte on the throne of France, nor had France then an
army of 600,000 men. (Hear, hear.) For the same reason
the money now spent on the navy must be much greater
than during the period alluded to, for it had been officially
announced to that house that France could man her fleet
when England could not man hers. A friend of his who had
just come from France had asked a gentleman high in the
naval department of that country whether the statements
made in that house relative to the condition of the French
navy were correct, and the answer he received was that as
regards the ships they were very nearly correct, but that as
regards the personnel they were far understated. He had
also been told by two gentlemen who had been at Toulon
beingTstt
hha
Therefore
t -
ropefhe
flt.
oaot
rchro werehalrei
andngsee
a:
it sevenatdhhn atedhtthey
i3t:
oeyeei
instead
French
toraees
amn'
greatd
csehtono
fre store
no
the
eellf
adef
loseveryssretcnoet
hosd
than
nomf descriptionutaahtl
ffsrol
;oeratonnnu fortnight
country
ytneo.
called attention to the fact that at the present moment the
number of sailors for the British fleet was 7,000 below the I
vote of the House of Commons. (Hear, hear.)
Sir F. SMITH expressed his regret that the present es-
timates were not deferred until the Secretary for India had
made his statement for India, because the number of men
for India must, to a certain extent, regulate the expense of
the establishment at home. (Hear, hear.)

Mr. PALK said that the Secretary of War had under-
aken to lay on the table of the house the report of the com-

mitteo on the defences of the country before Whitsuntide,
and he wished to know why that ii4.omise had not been

fulfilled. Of all questions the most important was that

relating to the defence of the country, and it should not be
allowed to be put off until nearly the end of the session.
(Hear.) The subject was a grea' er one than even reform
or the wine duties—(hear, hear)--and he warned the Go-
vernment that it was not a question to be trifled with.
Many questions might be postponed, as undoubtedly they
must be; but the question of the national defences could
not be postponed. The right hon. gentleman had promised
to state the details of the steps intended to be taken, and

also to lay upon the table the report of the commissioners, '
but if that was not done at once there would be no time for
the house to consider the subject fully as it deserved.
Mr. BENTINCK wished to know whether, before vote
12, which included a lump sum of £645,355 for fortifications,
was taken, any statement would be given of the details. He
believed that all such expenditure as that incurred at Alder-
ney was worse than wasted—(hear, bear)—because when-
ever the contingency occurred which all had in their minds,
although they did not like to name it—a French war—we
should have to find the men to defend the works. We should
be found to have built those fortifications for the enemy,
and not for ourselves, as the harbour was neither a harbour
of refuge nor of observation.
Mr. S. HERBERT—In answer to the last two speakers,
I venture to say, in spite of the hard words of the hon. gen-
tleman opposite, that I have not in any way shirked or
evaded my duty. I have given every attention to the sub-
ject, which is one of immense importance ; and I think no
gentleman will consider the Government ought to have laid
the report of the commissioners on the table without at
the same time being prepared to state the course they pro-
posed to adopt. The report is, I believe, so far advanced in
printing that I shall be able to layit on the table next week,
but it would not be right to do so until I could state the
course we propose to take with regard to the recommenda-
tions contained in it. In answer to the question of the hon.
member for West Norfolk (Mr. Bentinck), I may say that
I never intended to ask the house to vote a lump sum with-
out knowing the details. I inserted a lump sum because
when we were about to deal with the report of commis-
sions which contemplated works on a large scale, it was
necessary for me to put a vote in the estimates which might
be necessary if any action were taken upon the report, but
which must be altered in its proportion and distribution ac-
cording to subsequent decision. I proposed a vote, but Ido
not think the house ever anticipated that I should ask
them to grant it until all the details were explained. The
details shall be given before the house is asked to pass any
vote upon the subject. The questions raised have been so
numerous that I hardly know where to begin. (Hear.) I
think the hon. gentleman opposite began by asking whether
I could produce the correspondence that had taken place as
to the yeomanry not being called out for training this year;
and another hon. gentleman said there was great alarm in
the regiment he commanded lest the Government should
intend to do away with that constitutional force altogether,
and that the men were falling away in consequence. The
omission to call out the yeomanry is not without precedent.
It has occurred several times within my recollection, and no
further back than 1857. The yeomanry, however, have gone
on and flourished since that time, and I should be sorry that
any step taken by the Government, as this has been, under
pressure, should lead to the impression that they under-
valued the services of that force, or that it was not intended
to call them out again. I believe it is a most valuable force.
It may be a matter of consideration whether improvements
in its organisation might not be introduced, but the Govern-
ment has a high opinion of the value of the yeoman* ycorps,
and would not desire at all to discourage them. This year
I have been under severe pressure to provide materiel, so
that I was glad to avail myself of every source that would
enable me to meet what is most important—the permanent
defence of the country. The hon. baronet behind me has
referred to changdof officers from the Guards to regiments
of the Line. I know that of late years the Guards have been
very severely dealt with, and no one is more responsible for
that than myself, for I felt it my duty on former occasions"
to deal with great severity towards the Guards. But just
look at the difference which the warrant of 1854 has made.
Before that time the Guards, having always a stop in army
rank in advance of the Line, and in attaining by brevets the
rank of major-general they did occupy a position in the list
of major-generals quite disproportioned to their number.
But the warrant of 1854 did away with all that. It is true
they can exchange into the Line, but how seldom do you
find that done unless under very exceptional reasons ? A
lieutenant-colonel of the Line is qualified to become a full
colonel, but if he exchanges with a lieutenant-colonel of the
Guards he is qualified for nothing. That has made a very
great difference with regard to these exchanges, and the
gallant officer opposite has written an able pamphlet in
which he complains of the effect of the change which has
taken place. (Hear.) I feel, therefore, that when speak-
ing of this ancient corps, many of whose special privileges
have been taken from them during the last few years, and
when I recollect that I have been the instrument of doing
things that have pressed hardly upon them, I am bound to
say something for them. (Hear.) The hon. member for
Lambeth spoke of the great advantages possessed by the
Guards, and seemed to deride their services, as if they con-
sisted of little else than marching from the Tower to 'Wind-
sor and from Windsor to the Tower. The hon. member,
in so speaking, was utterly forgetful of the duties which
they have to discharge. (Hear.) 'Whenever there is an
important service to be performed, an expedition to be un-
dertaken, we uniformly go to the Guards, as a corps we
are sure to find in the finest state of discipline and efficiency.
(Hear, hear.) I was asked by the hon. baronet (Sir J.
Trelawny) whether or not aides-de-camp were subjected to
examination. I have to reply that, not only are they sub-
jected to examination, but to one of some importance,
and which exceeds in extent that of almost any other coun-
try in the world. They are examined, not on military
matters only, but in languages and other accomplishments.
I find that in Prussia, for example, which is the most exa-
mining country in the world, and where there is an almost
pedantic adherence to theoretical tests, there is no exami-
nation for aides-de-camp. It is, however, strictly carried
out with us, and I believe it is attended with very great
advantages. (Hear.) A gallant officer opposite spoke of
the expense of the disembodied militia, but he also said that,
after all, if it was found to be of service for recruiting the
array he did not see how it could be abolished without de-
triment to the public service. (Hear.) There used to be
a vast amount of men in this department on paper, who
were maintained in this position because it was said that
if that number of men no longer existed the difference
would be filled up by men who would only enlist to
abscond. All these paper men had now been struck off,
I do not know it officially, as the returns have not yet been
sent in ; but I have reason to believe that all the men have
been struck off who do not really exist, and who have either
deserted or gone over to the line. I have also just sent out
a circular to the colonels of disembodied militia, containing
the most stringent regulations against recruiting parties at-
tempting to induce disembodied militiamen to leave the
militia to join the line, because I think there is no more use
in asking a militiaman to go to the line than there would
be to ask a man to leave one regiment for another. (Hear,
hear.) The officers of the militia when they know they
are protected from that invasion will have recourse to a class
of men not very valuable for the line but valuable for the
militia—men of fixed habits and whose characters are
known. (Hear, hear.) In this matter I think that not only
the house but the public cut of doors are run away with by
the comparison which they make between an embodied and
disembodied regiment. It is said that 28 days' pay will not
make an efficient soldier. No one says it will. If you want
to make an efficient soldier pay him all the year round.
But if you want a reserve that will not cost much, and
which by further training can be made efficient men, then
I say the system of 28 days' pay will, as near as possible,
combine the two objects of cheapness on the one side and a
certain advance towards efficiency on the other. (Hear,
hear.) Tke hon. member for Lambeth complains that the
two sides of the house uniformly support each other when
the estimates come to be considered, and that the economy
of the service cannot in consequence be carried out ; for,
whatever difference of opinion there may be on other ques-
tions, they are always, he says, sure to combine to main-
tain the estimates. Now, I think I can explain this by say-
ing that on other questions we are more or less regulated
by party feelings, but that no one can shut his eyes to the
necessity that exists of having this country at all times in
such a state of defence as to make it secure against the ag-
gressions of an enemy. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gen-
tleman (Gen. Peel) has referred to the system of reliefs, of
which he complained. All I can say is that, though the
rules which have been laid down for reliefs are adhered to
as closely as possible, there are often disturbing causes at
work that prevent them being regularly carried out. Thus,
the Indian war, the Russian war, and the Indian mutiny
very materially disturbed the arrangements that had been
made, and at ono time during the Russian war we had not
more than 24,000 troops in England. This arose because,
with a small establishment, we were attempting to carry on
a great war. (Hear.) 'We are told of those times when,
during the administration of Wellington and Peel, the
military and naval expenditure of the country was so much
less than at present, the army estimates being £11,000,000
less than now ; but we must recollect t hat this great reduc-
took place when the whole face of Europe was exceedingly
pacific ; and we must also recollect that for that state of
things we are now paying—(hear, hear)—for it was the
lowering of our stores, and the reduction of our armaments
in those times that have imposed on us now the heavy
burdens we are called to bear. (Hear, hear.) We have
been for years at the War-office striving to retrieve this
error, for we were deficient in stores in every part of the
world, and it is an error that I trust we shall not fall into
again. (Hear, hear.) I think we are bound to look most
closely to every item of our vast expenditure; but I con-
fess that I find great difficulty in carrying out this
object, in consequence of the claims that are constantly
put in now by one class of officers and now by another,

all of which would go to increase greatly our military
expenditure. The Secretary for War, however, is bound
to recollect that we have got the most expensive and most
highly paid army in. Europe, and that every time the cost

of that army is increased the effect is to diminish its num-

bers. (Hear.) A question has been put to me about the
Land Transport Corps. I had thought that the question
_ _

of the Land Transport Corps was long since settled, and I
confess I was somewhat alarmed when I was charged with

not having kept good faith with the persons making the
claims now urged. An hen. gentleman spoke of their being
promised 6s, a-day, and that the agreement was,that they
were to be taken for two years, but that agreement, it
turned out, was only to be carried into effect provided their
services were required. Then the hon. member for Green-
wich got up with a gigantic placard in his hand—(a laugh)
—and I confess I was somewhat alarmed, thinking it
almost impossible but that some recruiting zealot, regard-
less of truth, had made some promise of a three months'
gratuity on service for two years. (Hear.) Not a bit, The
placard agreed with the attestation. The Government had
adhered to their bargain, and there was not a shadow of a
case of grievance against them, Lord Panmure appointed

a board of officers to consider the complaints of these men.
They refused to acknowledge the authority of a deputation
or a committee, for these men had got into the lawyer's
hands. But they heard every individual, and they settled
their claims satisfactorily. I now come to the question
which my hon. and gallant friend (Colonel Lindsay)
brought under the notice of the house relative to the offi-
cers who in 1826 accepted unattached rank en half-pay,
the Government . having thought it necessary to relieve
the list. My predecessor in office thought that the
case on the part of these officers was a good
one, and he referred to the Treasury, who refused
the claim. I am, therefore, impartial in the
matter. I thought there was a doubt upon the interpreta-
tion of the general order, but I think, upon the whole, that
the Treasury was right. No one would have made so im-
provident a proposal as that these officers should be pro-
meted by steps of unattached rank, and should have, not
only the advantages of half•pay, but also the advantages of
full-pay during that time. Two years before that period a
rule was established requiring six years' service as field-
officer before a man could become a major-general. These
officers thought it a hardship that they should go upon half-
pay and lose 4s. fid. a day for so many years. But they
got their steps in promotion, they were freed from foreign
service, and they rose in rank to be brevet officers. The
hon. and gallant gentleman says they did not intend to
marry, but that was their misfortune. (A laugh.) What
was the object of the rule ? A man was to serve six years
as a field-officer, because the experience of a field-officer's
rank is necessary to make a General officer. If the Go-
vernment guaranteed to them a dispensation from the
six years' service as field-officers, they would not
only have all the advantages of half-pay and full-pay,
but another advantage which full-pay could not procure
for them—namely, the dispensation from service as field-
officers. This would bo a solution of the problem that has
puzzled so many people —how to eat your cake and
have your cake. They would gain a step in rank,
they would be receiving their half-pay at home, and
at the end of the period they would be in as good a posi-
tion as an officer who had been under a grilling sun in
the East or 'West Indies, or had served in the most un-
healthy climate. Although there might be a doubt on the
words of the general order, I think the Treasury upon the
whole came to a wise and just decision in this particular
case. 'With regard to the question of the compulsory re-
tirement of medical men at 55, the warrant gives them great
advantages in a higher half-pay. There is, too, this to be
said, that, although the rule may be said to be an arbitrary
one, it is not only advantageous to the soldier, but to the
medical profession, as it entails more rapid promotion in the
regiment, and gives the soldier the benefit of the service of
men in the vigour of their age. I now come to the question
raised by my hon. friend, who says we have been doing a
great injustice unwittingly to some of the colonies. There
are in the estimates all the sums that the different colonies
pay in aid of the militia expenses of the colony, and which
are paid under arrangement into the Exchequer. The par-
ticular colony of Victoria, which is, I admit, one of the
most liberal, does not appear on that page, because the sum
is paid into the Exchequer either as colonial allowances, or
to cover the whole pay and allowances. 'When the regi-
ments are serving in India the payment is left blank, be-
cause the Indian Government undertakes the payment.
When a regiment in Australia is paid entirely by the Aus-
, tralian Government it ought to stand with that explanation
against it; but there is this difficulty in the way:—We
make our estimates for the year to come three or four
months before the estimates are agreed to. We ought to
know beforehand what the colony intends to do. The co-
lony at different times, either from local financial difficul-
ties or other causes has taken different views, and we, of
course, are not aware whether by a vote they may not de-
cline to advance their money. If, however, we could come
to a clear and definite arrangement for a payment extending
over a certain period the difficulty would be got rid of. I,
for ono, should be glad to see a colony so l,ublic spirited
receive full credit for its liberality on the estimates. I will
not now enter upon the subject of colonial defences intro-
duced by the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Adderley)—a eub-
ject of all others requiring the most careful, deliberate, and
delicate handling. (Hear.) It would be taken very ill in
the colonies if the Government, without consulting them
and giving them an opportunity of pointing out any excep-
tional circumstances, were to announce that they were
' going to apply a Procrustean rule to them as to the pay-
' ment by them of the expenses of colonial defence. (Hear.)
We have the advantage of the labours of the committee,
and the very clear and able rule they have laid down, and,
on the other hand, we have the exceptions taken by one of
the committee to some of the opinions in the report. If
the world were ruled by logic the arguments might be very
good, but men have feelings and passions which must be
taken into consideration, and upon no subject is it more
necessary to act with care and caution than upon one so
largely appealing to the interests, feelings, and hopes of the
different colonies that compose our colonial empire. (Hear,
hesr.) I come now to the question of the artillery corps.
I must say that a great deal of the argument of my hon.
and gallant friend I thought it extremely sound, but I can-
not help suspecting that he as an artillery officer did not
examine both sides of the question. The artillery and en-
gineer officers are a peculiar body, and have almost a mo-
nopoly of a vast number of places and appointments to
which they are fully entitled by their attainments, but
from which officers of the line are excluded. They aro a
seniority corps—(hear, hear)—without purchase and with-
out selection, and the result is that until a great aug-
mentation of the force has made the junior officers young
men you have men of very advanced age in the upper
ranks. Tho average age of the full generals of artillery
was, I believe, lately 84 years. (A laugh.) The average
age of 15 officers commanding brigades, answering to the
colonels of regiments, was 78, and of 16 unattached officers
71 years. The three supernumeraries are, I believe, all
employed. The same observation, of course, applies to the
engineers. The pay of artillery officers is very high. A bri-
gade of artillery, which answers to a battalion of the line,
has a colonel, who is generally on leave, another colonel in
command, and four lieutenant-colonels. The officers of ar-
tillery enjoy an entire monopoly of the staff of their own
corps. It would not do to make an officer of the lino Adju-
tant-General of Artillery; but the staff appointments of the
line are open to officers of artillery. Now these are all de-
cided advantages. The number of artillery officers employed
in other departments not strictly military is very large, and
I own that, in my opinion, it is only what they are fairly
entitled to from their superior attainments. There are 29
officers of artillery on the staff, including Colonel Bingham,
Colonel Wodehouse, Colonel Dickson, &o. Colonel Wilford
is Governor of the Cadet Company ; Colonel Tulloch, Royal
gun-carriage department; Colonel Askwith, gunpowder
manufactory ; Colonels St. George and Rowan, and Lieu-
tenant-Colonels Campbell, Younghusband, and Smythe,
War Departfnent ; and so on, to the number of
40 altogether, in civil employment. All these things
must be taken into consideration as a make-weight
against the lesser employment of the staff of artillery
officers in other capacities. I think that officers of that
corps placed in command in districts where the artillery
amount to 4,000 or 5,000 men have a fair claim to
consideration, and I believe this matter is now under
the consideration of the Commander-in-Chief. As the
hon. gentleman (Mr. Connolly) who complained of the
scandalous outrage committed on his proprietary rights as
the owner of a large fishery, has postponed his motion, I
need not go into the question now. His argument is that
when the War Department lease a property, they do so for
military purposes alone, and therefore acquire only the right
of firing guns or whatever it may be, without any manorial
rights. I cannot admit that such is the case. I hold that
wh.n the War Department buys land, it buys everything
belonging to it, the same as any other purchaser ; and I do
not see why the public should be robbed of those particular
rights, when they pay for them.
General PEEL.—And pay a great deal more than any-
body else.
Mr. S. HERBERT.--A great deal more, no doubt ; and
therefore I do not see why we should give up any of our
rights. I come now to the speech of the gallant officer the
member for Westminster (SireDe L. Evans). He said,
with great truth, that in a committee upstairs after we had
discussed the subject of the responsibility of the Secretary
of State for the appointrce4 of officers of high rank, when
he asked whether or not I was responsible for the appoint-
ment of General Grey to be colonel of a regiment, I replied
that I should prefer to have that question addressed to me
in the House of Commons. I thought that if a transaction
of that sort was to be publicly questioned, it ought to be
done where it could be publicly defended. (Hear, hear.)
The gallant officer began by reading extracts from the evi-
dence given by Lord Fitzroy Somerset, to the effect that
the colonelcies of regiments were given to three classes of
officers—first, to those who had distinguished themselves
in war; second, to those who had performed colonial ser-
vices ; and, third, to those who had commanded efficiently
and respectably at home. The gallant officer supposed that
General Grey's appointment came under the last head.
That is a mistake ; it did not come under the last head. I
lace seen it stated in the public prints that General Grey
was an officer who was never out of Hyde-park ; and by way
of cumulating all his offences that he was a guardsman. (A
laugh.) General Grey never was a guardsman. He was in
the line all his life. He was attached to the 43d Regi-
ment, and was twice on colonial service with it. He was
colonel of the 71st Regiment, and visited Canada with it.
lie commanded it for nine years. During the whole time
General Grey was in the army there were only two occasions
when there was a foreign expedition of any kind—one was
to Portugal and the other to Canada, when the rebellion
had broken out ; and he happened to take part in both. I
wish to destroy entirely the notion that General Grey has
been a stranger to service out of Hyde-park. He comes
under the category of having served in the colonies. Lord
Fitzroy Somerset laid down correctly the rules which had
hitherto prevailed in disposing of these colonelcies. They
are not given according to strict seniority. Officers are
occasionally passed over by those who are their juniors.
That was General Grey's case. He was passed over th eo
or four times, and (ace by a very excellent officer, who had I
seen no service—General Breton, who is now in Mauritius.
It is said there are officers senior to General Grey, who can
point to long and distinguished service. General Bell's
name has been mentioned; but on referring to the Artny L ist
I find he is consider ably the junior of Gen. Grey. There
are officers who have served in the Peninsula, but theyhave
done nothing since. What has any one to say against
General Grey ? Officer after officer has been appointed with

less service than he can show. In answer to the question
addressed to me on this point, I may say that the Secretary
of State is responsible for th,,se appointments, but that he
acts on the recommendation of the Commander-in-Chief.
The Duke of Cambridge said to me—" I think General
Grey's services aro such that he ought not to be passed over
any longer; I think nothing could be more wrong than to
make him colonel of a regiment on the ground that he has
a place at Court." No one can deny that. " But," he
added," " it would be most unjust to refuse him the place
if he has otherwise a title to it, because he has an office at
Court." I asked his Royal Highness whether, if General
ffrey were General Smith, with no place at Court, and un-
connected with any known family, but with some service
to point to, he would be entitled to the place, and the
answer was that he would have got the appointment before
this. Therefore, merely because a man happens to possess
a place at Court, and there may be an outcry in the public
prints about his getting any other place, it would be a
shabby, cowardly thing not to give him a post of this sort
when it falls vacant, and he has otherwise a fair claim to it.
Once lay down the rule that a man who has a place at
Court is not to receive the reward to which he is otherwise
entitled for service in the army, and what will be the re-
sult ? Her Majesty has surrounded her children with
officers of distinction. The Prince of Wales is attended by
General Bruce and Major Teesdale, Prince Alfred by
Colonel Cowell, Prince Arthur by Major Elphinstone.
Well, once make it the rule that the moment a man accepts
a Court place a black mark shall be set against his name,
that his past service shall not count, that he shall be de-
barred from receiving the legitimate honours of his profes-
sion, and you exclude from the places which it is the inte-
rest of the country to have filled by the best men the very
officers whom you would yourselves select, as the best per-
sons to discharge the duties. Nothing could be more un-
just than to lay down such a rule. The gallant officer who
brought this matter forward said I spoke to him so confi-
dently he supposed I had a good case. I believe I have a
good case, and I repeat it would have been a mean, shabby,
cowardly thing to have refused an officer, on account of
name, position, or connexion, that reward to which, in the
ordinary course of service, he was fairly entitled. It has been
said that Sir H. Inglis has been recommended to the colonelcy
of a regiment out of his turn. I own that such a step may
be taken exception to ; but as the gallant officer had re-
turned from India with broken health, and as this was the
regiment with which he defended Lucknow, both the Duke
of Cambridge and myself were of opinion that it would
be a just and graceful act to offer him, although
out of his turn, the command of the regiment with which
he had been so honourably associated. (Hear, hear.) I
will not now make any further observati ns, but after this
long discussion I trust the House will allow me to take, at
any rate, the first vote. The difference in the number of
men is very small, only about 2,000. The discussion may
be taken on the next vote for the pay, and we shall then
have taken one step in considering these estimates.
Mr. DISRAELI said he would only interpose for a mo-
ment, as he thought the right hon. gentleman was entitled
to their assistance after the able manner in which he had
replied to the diversified subjects brought under his notice.
(Cheers.) The question which had been raised by the gal-
lant general the member for Westminster was one of greater
importance than the mere merits of an individual or the pro-
priety of a single appointment, and he thought the House
would do well to express, though not in any formal man-
ner, its opinion upon it. He could certainly have no pre-
judice in favour of General Grey, because his earliest re-
collections were associated with having stood three con-
tested elections with General Grey, in all of which he
had been vanquished by that gentleman, and they were
at a time of life when defeat did not leave the same
amiable results which in after life were experienced.
(Laughter.) But he thought the right hon. gentleman the
Secretary of State had given a sufficient answer to the
charge that General Grey was not entitled by his services
to promotion. The right hon. gentleman had very properly
reminded them that the question was whether they were to
lay down the rule that because an officer held an
appointment at Court, he was therefore to be looked upon
as a soldier who was not able to obtain promotion in the
profession to which ho belonged. It was not merely in re-
ference to our own Court and our own Princes that those
in immediate attendance on the Royal family were mem-
bers of the military profession. It had been the custom
during the last two centuries in Europe. It was quite un-
necessary to dsscuss the propriety of the custom. Very
good reasons, if necessary, could no doubt be given; but
this was a practical assembly, which had only to deal with
facts, and it was a fact that the households of Sovereigns
and of Princes near the throne wore formed invariably of
members of the military profession. The consequence of
any rule that they should not be entitled to preferment in
their profession must be, that they must have, in the Royal
household, a very inferior class of persons. It was not the
interest of the country that the Sovereign and princes of
the Royal Family should be surrounded by military
parasites. (Hear, hear.) As long as the present system
prevailed—and he saw no reason why it should cease to pre-
vail—it was of the utmost importance, and of the highest
public interest, that officers who accepted appointments in
the Royal household should be men of the highest class:
(Hear, hear.) The public interest was that individuals
occupying such a position should, by their culti%ation and
general feelings, be men who would, by their high qualities,
exercise a beneficial influence on the sentiments of those
with whom they were brought in contact. The gallant
gentleman whose name had been called in question was one
who certainly fulfilled that condition. He was the son of
an illustrious statesman. He was a distinguished man in
his own profession, And ho believed it would be acknow-
ledged by all that he had performed the duties of his office
at Court in a manner which entitled him to the confidence
of the public. (Cheers.)
Colonel DICKSON said the appointment of Sir J. Inglis
was really little more than a graceful compliment, as he
would have to resign the pension which had been conferred
upon him for distinguished services.

The house then went into committee about half-past 11

o'clock.

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.

Mr. S. HERBERT asked the house to vote 1,007 addi-
tional men, about 7,000, in lieu of 5,000 having come home
from India. There were some small reductions, scarcely
of sufficient importance to mention. On the third vote, for
the land forces, there was a reduction of £54,000, from the
reduced number of men to be raised. There was a saving
of £5,000 in the purchase of horses, in consequence of Field
Artillery not raised. There was a small diminution by the
abolition of a military prison in Canada. There was a re-
duction of £75,957 in wages, which was part of the reduc-
tion made on the vote for stores, in consequence of a less
amount of work performed in the carriage department. The
carriage department was at the head of the gun department,
and therefore it was thought better to make a reduction to
that extent. With respect to the reduction of clothing it
was owing to their not having to give the three kits to the
troops from India which they would have to give if the
men had to be raised.
Colonel HERBERT complained that regiments of the
line at home were kept weak while a largo sum was ex-
pended on the embodied militia.
Mr. S. HERBERT, in reply to General Upton, said he
could not hold out any hope that the Government would
increase the rate of pension ; and, in his opinion, it would
he a better course to increase the pay than to increase the
pension—a course which he was persuaded would tend
more to increase the efficiency of the army than that sug-
gested by the hon. and gallant general, and moreover, as
the term of service had been shortened, there was not the
same necessity that would otherwise exist.
The vote, after a few remarks by Sir F. SMITH, in re-
ference to a discrepancy in the figures, was then agreed to.
On the motion that a sum of £3,236,701 be granted to
her Majesty towards completing the pay and allowances of
the land forces,
Colonel LIN 'SAY said the army was very much in-
debted to the right hon. gentleman for the improvements
ho had introduced. With regard to the old warrant, he
begged to observe that when a man had given eighteen
years' service, he became entitled for that time to increased
pay for good conduct marks ; and also if he served sixteen
years clear of that time without having been on the default
book. The number of years under the new warrant had
been reduced, and might, in his opinion, be still more re-
duced with advantage. With regard to officers who had
served five years on the staff, he thought it a great disad-
vantage that they might then be removed from that branch
of the service. He had given notice on that subject.
Take, for instance, an officer holding the rank of adjutant-
general, after he had served five years upon the staff at
£l6O a year, he was then removed from that rank and re-
duced to an income of £2OO a year. He thought that not
right. They now wanted to encourage their best officers
to serve on the staff, and they also compelled them to go
through a superior mode of education to prepare themselves
for the staff appointments ; but after they had got them
they in a short time removed them from that branch of the
service. Now he contended, if they compelled their best
officers to go on half-pay after they had served with ability
on the staff, such a course would prove very discouraging.
They, by such a course, turned those officers adrift.
Sir JOHN TRELAWNY said he was not satisfied
with the explanation of the right hon. gentleman the
Secretary at War in relation to the appointment of General
the Hon. Sir C. Grey to.the colonelcy of a regiment. I
was not, in his opinion, sufficient for the right hon. gentle

than to state that General Grey was in every respect quali

fled for the appointment. His opinion was that the righ

hon. gentleman should have shown the house that no other

officer had been passed over whose services were more dis-
tinguished, or who was more entttled to receive such an

appointment. (Hear, hear.)
Lord HOTHAM said, the right hon. gentleman the
Secretary at War had stated on a former occasion that
officers would not henceforth be considered qualified to

hold staff appointments if they had not passed the exami-
nations at the Staff College; but that principle was not
adhered to. With regard to General Grey, he begged to
_ . _

say that he considered hint quite qualified and entitled to
fill the appointment that had been conferred upon him.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. CHILDERS observed that the Australian colonies
contributed to the maintenance of the troops which gar-
risoned them, but those allowances were not so clearly s
forth in the estimates as was desirable.

Colonel S. KNOX wished to ask the right hon. gentle-
man what was tile use of a general comnianding a brigade