The Sun.
London, England, 1861-05-10 00:00:00

those items showed an increase of £5,609. He wished, then,
to know whether ho was precluded, by the new arrange-
ments respecting the estimates, from mo7ing that increase

be omitted.

Mr. MASSEY said if the hon. gentleman moved an
amendment in relation to the• gross sum, the effect would
be to precludLother hon. members from moving amend-
ments in the details.
Mr. CHILDERS, referring to the War Department,
said in 1856 they were employing 216,000 men, and they
were now employing only 146,000 ; and while in 1356 the
year of the war with Russia—they expended, when they
had 246,000 men, £35,000,000 ; they were now, with
100,000 men less, expending more in proportion than in
that year which was a year of war. Then with respect to
the War Department, they were asked in 1856, when they
were at war, for £175,000, and for the Horse Guards
£25,000; but in this year, in a time of peace, they were
asked for the War Department £169,000, and for the Horse
Guards £22,000. Now, he wanted to know how, seeing
that they had such a vastly-decreased number of men, that
could be explained.
Captain JERVIS said it would be well if the house
would pay particular attention to one point. He found
that there was at the War-office a Secretary for Military
Correspondence, and he wanted to know what was meant
by that. When he was receiving his military education at
Woolwich he found that every item was military cor-
respondence. He thought much of the fault of the defec-
tive system in that matter was attributable to the country
refusing to recognise the army as a profession, and that led
to expense.
Colonel SYKES said the task of any independent mem-
ber of that house to attempt to reduce the military estimates
in their details was utterly hopeless. He might have a
dozen or so of supporters; but the Government, with the
forces at their command, would overwhelm him. He wished
to know why there was a Director of Ordnance this year at
an expense of £l,OOO a-year, and an additional expenditure
of £1,200 a •year in the Accountant-General's department.
Colonel LINDSAY hoped the Under-Secretary for War
would explain fully and frankly what were the intentions
of the Government with respect to the organisation of the
War Department.
Mr. MELLOR said that he principally rose in conse-
quence of insinuations made by hon. members, who did not
find some one always ready to support their crotchets, that
those who placed their hands to a document calling upon
the nk.ble lord at the head of the Government to enforce
retrenchment in the expenditure, and who called themselves
financial reformers, did not attend in their places when the
estimates were discussed. As one of those who had at-
tached their names to the document in question, he ex-
plained that he thought it better to make a representation
to the heads of departments, instead of discussing the esti-
mates in all cases, for his experience showed him that little
was effected by those discussions. He had signed the do-
cument to Lord Palmerston because he thought the Go-
vernment, having better information as to the necessities of

the services than independent members could have, that the
result he desired to produce would be better served by a re-
presentation to the heads of depax talents than by empty
_ . _

discussions in tile house.

Mr. DISRAELI considered nothing more dangerous, or
nothing that the House of Commons ought to show in a
significant manner its disappprobation of, than the princi-
ple upon which the observations of the hon. member wbo
had just spoken rested, namely, that the control of the
House of Commons was a mere delusion. Nothing, pos-
sibly, could be more injurious or more destructive of the
constitutional influence of the house than the opinions of
the hon. gentleman if they were founded in fact. That

they were net t 3 bring the expenditure of the country be-
fore the tribunal appointed by the country for the pur-
pose, but that they should lurk in the anti-chambers of
ministers in order that they might make their peace with
their constituents,—that was one of the most dangerous
doctrines that could possibly be expressed, and he should
be sorry that any hon. gentleman opposite, to whom
be gave credit for feelings as pure as those by which
they were actuated on that side of the house, could for one
moment, upon reflection, give it their sanction. The House
of Commons was the proper place where the expenditure of
the country ought to be brought forward by the Govern-
ment, criticised by the representatives of the people, and
adopted according to the balance of opinion in the house.
Totally false in
principle and fatal in practice as were the
opinions of the hon. gentleman, he entirely contradicted
them in point of fact. tie denied that it was an idle and
barren ceremony that members should criticise with care
the estimates of expenditure submitted by the Government
to the house. He also denied that there had ever been a
fair appeal for reduction brought forward that had proved
fruitless. The doctrine laid down by the hon. member was
one against which he protested, and he trusted it would be
utterly disregarded by the house. (Hear.)
Mr. MELLOR said the right hon. gentleman had im-
puted to him sentiments which he never uttered, and he
utterly denied having ever said anything which could be
construed into a disparagement ofdiscussions in that house
on the estimates, although he freely confessed that expe-
rience led him to believe that discussions on small items
Ni'ere of very little use. .

Sir W. .ICIT,IXFVE thought the right hon. gentleman
(Mr. Disraeli) was justifiei in the observations he had
made, and regretted that one who seemed to know so little
of the subject should have detained the house so long in
saying nothing.
After a few words from Mr. CRAUPURD,
Colonel DUNNE said he felt himself justified in calling
the attention of the committee to the expenditure in the
War Department, and was surprised to find a professed
financial ref,rmer objecting to him for doing so. (Hear.)
Mr. T. G. BARING said the appointments referred to
by the hon. member were not new appointments, and
therefore no additional expense was incurred. With regard
'to the stores much of the military stores were supplied from
the naval stores, which this year amounted to nearly a mil-
lion of money. The new Accountant-General did not occa-
sion expenses, because the salary had been reduced from
£1,500 to £l,OOO. The salary attached to the office of Trea-
sury writer was only £6OO, the former salary being £l,OOO.
The duties which this officer (Mr. Marsham) had to per-
form were very considerable and the remuneration com-
paratively small. The reason why there had been an
increase in the number of temporary tlerks was that there
was an ir crease in the businegs, .but- as there would be a
diminution in the number of the hiller class of clerks the
expenses on the whole would not be much greater than
usual. With respect to the provision for defences of the
country, the country would find that they were in a supe-
rior condition, and that the condition of our fortifications
would fully justify the Government as to the amount ex-
pended on them. The committee which sat last year on mili-
tary organisation recommended the appointment of an officer
to be designated the Director •General of Ordnance. That
officer had been appointed, and experience had justified the
recommendation of the committee in that particular.
(Hear, hear.) As to the officer whose duty it was to super-
intend the clothing department the committee could not fail
to perceive that such an officer was absolutely necessary,
and that his appointment would be more• conducive to
economy than to extravagance. With respect to the obser-
vation of the hon. member for Pontefract, he (Mr. T. G.
Baring) did not undertake to show that any particular
item in the estimates was less than it was in former years,
but he was prepared to show that the estimate was framed
with a due regard to economy and efficiency. The expen-
diture of the War Office this year was less than it was
in 1853-ft. In that year the expenditure was £179,000,
while this year it was less by some hundreds of pounds.
and it was to be recollected that the volunteer system had
caused an increase in the expenses of the year. He did not
agree thitt the organisation of the War Office was defective.
The recommendation of the committee of the house on this
subject had been carefully attended to by the Government.
Colonel DICK SON thought the time had come when
some stop should be put to the monstrous extravagance of
the war oince. Thcw Lad hewn an addition within late
years of 40,000 men to the army, wl,ll- ~r
increased by the sum of £BO,OOO. In fact, there were so
many clerks in the office that they were tumbling over each
other, and he would therefore move that this vote be re-
duced by the sum of £50,000. (Hear, hear, and laughter.)
Mr. BARING said he was glad of the admission of
the hon. and gallant officer that the work in the War
Office was done well. Indeed, no one in his position could
stand before the house to explain unless he was assisted by
men of the great ability, industry, and zeal, of those who
filled. ositions in that office. With respect to supernumerary
ri
lhte
the
ed
thadion ca r
ea
reduction
ealready
explained the causes which had
ledlo eu to ,
in their number, and also that it
ld in the higher paid offices. As
to the contrast drawn between the Bank of England and
the War Office, there was this difference, that only a small
t ortion of the clerks were required for accounts, while
would
there were many clerks required to attend to correspond-
ence which involved higher acquirements on the part of
those so occupied. With respect to the pledge the hon.
baronet the member for Evesham had asked him to give,
that this vote if granted would not be exceeded, he was
prepared to say that the best efforts of the Government
would be given to prevent any excess, and ho believed it
would be found amply sufficient. He denied the state-
ment that the cost of the civil list had increased in a greater
proportion than was warranted by the increase of the army.
Col. DICKSON said, if the hon. gentleman could explain
why the vote should be so large he would be satisfied. He
did not, however, see why so wary clerks should be employed
in the War Office.

Mr. MONSELL said the hon. and gallant member was
he believed in error in his statements as to expenditure in
this department in former years.
Mr. WYLD thought the number of clirks in the War
Department might be considerably reduced,

Mr. CONINGIIAM said the scale of remuneration paid
to those clerks might be greatly reduced. He considered
£l,OOO a-year to the precis writer in the War Office too
much. There were many well qualified lierary men who
would be glad to do the duty for £5OO a-par.
After a few words from Mr. T. O. BAltl,G, the committee
divided, when the numbers were—

For the vote
..... 131
Against
..... 100
Majority in favour of the vote.. • •--31

Mr. CIIILDERS next moved that tha sum of £95,840,
for salaries of clerks in the War Office be reelticed 14 %51W