The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-12 00:00:00

sible way. If officers who had been for years serving
their country in various: parts of the world were to be
subjected to a sort of scholastic examination—if the title
to promotion was to be determined by a proficiency in
algebra and Cocker, it was sufficient to disgust them. For
his own tart, he would rather throw up his commission
than be subjected to it. He thought the new regulation
perfectly uncalled for; as there never was a period when
the officers of the army were so well educated as they
now were. The evil at present was, that there was no
incentive to preficieucy in study in the military pr,f:s-
sion. He would institute an examination of a voluntary
and optional character. He would invite the officers
to offer themselves as candidates, and he would esta-
blish a board of examiners, composed of officers of the
highest rank, who should examine the candidates upon
eve •y branch of their profession. He could not sit down
without observing that there never was an occasion to
which the obiervation of the lion. Member for Dum-
fries, that the British army was tbe most uuintellectual
one in Europe, so little applied as the present. There
was no ground whatever for such an assertion.
Mr. COBDEN said, that while there was an appareet
reductio❑ of 4,126 men, there hail been 2,230 men trans-
!erred to India, leaving only 1,636 as the real reduction.
There were also 128 office's less charge I in the ac-
counts; but the real reduction was only 32, for there
were 96 drafted to India. Of all the ranks of officers,
down to second lieu•eeants and ensigns, the number last
ow was 5,103, while fir the pro-out yen- the number
was 5,105, so that the reduction, 932, took place amongst
the a ijutaut quartermasters, and surgeons. That was
sufficient to justify the demand for reform. They
drafte 1 off the rank and file —they reduce! the effenive
three of the army. hut, they did not reduce the num-
hers of the off. ere. With reference to the future force
to be kept up, a good deal had been said connecting that
question with the course to be t ikon toward the colonies.
No doubt all depended upon the stature of that course,
an I the Hon. Member for Southwark had cited statistics
with respect t•, the colonies which were sufficient to
justify the ruction of the lion. Member for Montrose.
rhe present was the time to Fettle the question, when
they were about to grant constitutions to the colonies.
If, indeed, they had a voice in framing the estimate', as
was the case in France and the United States, thecase

might be different; but they knew nothing of the esti-
reatls until they were laid before them in the House, and
the only question submitted to them was, whether they
would vote a certain number of men, and on that number
would depend the expenditure. There should be no
pot tponement of a decision of his question,, and how, he
should ask, could Government ream) the expenditure
if the establishments were not reinced? The ought to
insert a clause in the colunial constitutions requiring
them to maintain the cost of their own police and mili-
tary establishments.

Lord J. MANNERS concurred with the Hon. Mem-
ll3r for the West Riding, that the speech of the Hon.
Member for Southwark was the only one of all those
delivered by the supporters of the motion of the Hon.
Member for Montrose which offered anything like an
argument in its favour. But he thought he could show
that the lion. Gentleman's speech, which was thus so

. -
much relied on by the Hon. Member for the West
Riding, made rather against the motion, for the Hon.
Member considered that 7,500 men only could be struck
off; whereas the motion was t) strike off 10,000 men.
That certainly did not support the conclusion arrived at
by the Hon. Gentleman. The Hon. Member for Mid-
dlesex had touchel upon the question of the clothing of
the army, and ho (Lord Manners) would express
a hope that in future years care would be Wren
that no room would be given for those pair fal and dis-
graceful discussions with which the country had been
startled during the autumn, and that they might be
able to entertain the conviction that the clothing of the
army would be carried on upon principles of justice and
humanity, and that they might not have their con-
sciences affected by the apprehension that those poor
people for whom so much sympathy had been ex-
pressed were reduced to a position at once painful and
degralecl.

-Bir W. MOLESWORTH explained that what he had
said wai, that in the colonies, properly so called, the
reduction might amount to 7,500 men; but taking our
possessions into consideration, the reduction might be
much greater—equal certainly to the motion of the lion.
Member for Alontrosp.

Colonel DUNNE denied that it would be any advan-
tage to reduce the number of cavalry officers, f,.)r they
must have a nucl,ms for each regiment on its comple-
ment being completed. He did not think the British
cavalry at all over efficient; and with regard to three of
our possessions—Gibral ar, Malta, and Corfu, he be-
lieved the garrisons were not more than sufficient. Ho
had t thank the Secretary at War for the attention
which he had paid to the education of the army.
Mr. V. SMITH said that the lion. and Gallant Officer
had alluded t 9 fortresses, while the Hon. Member fir
Southwark had referred to colonies. He agreed with the
Hon. Member for Southwark and the lion. Member for

the West Riding, as to the necessity of reducing the
number of truops in the cr,lonies; but he was not pre-
pared to support the motion of the Hon. Member fur
Montrose, because if they voted a reduction of 10,000
men, the vote would not be understood by the country.
Last year the Secretary at War stated to the Committee
which inqulred into the subject that ho bad written
to one of our most important colonies, the Cape,
that in future they would have to rely on themselves fir
icfnice. His ow❑ opinion wJ,c, that the troops in some
of our colonies ought to be witdrawn, or the expense
thrown upon the colonies. He felt cidnvinced that the
Kafir war would never have arisen if we had not had

troops in the colony—(Laughter and dissent). A former
war had been more easily suppressed by the inhabitants
of the colony than the last war had been by the troops.
He agreed with the Hon. Member for the West Biding,
that as they were about to leave the colonists to self-
government, they ought also to leave to them the duty
of self-defence (Hear, bear.) Some intimation should
be made to the colonists of the policy which Govern.
ment meant to pursue towards them in this respect.
Danger might arise from leaving matters in their pre-
went state. Canada had obtained responsible govern-
ment, and if it inclined to annexation with the United
States, our troops in the colony might act, and we should
be involved in war—(Hear.) We should therefore come

to some understanding with our colonies with regard to
their defence. Free trade and the ;epeal of the Navi-
gation Act had completely changed the relations be-
twgen us and our colonies; and the time was therefore
f Arourable for entering into some new arrangement with
them, so that we might know what to expect from them
and they from us. If there was to be a separation,
he would have it take place on good terms, and not on

Mr. REYNOLDS regretted he could not support the
motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose. The HOD.
and Gallant Member for Chippenham had stated he
would support the army in Ireland from a feeling of
compassion towards the impoverished people of that
country. The Hon. Member for Birmingham had called
it a colonial question. It was so in our distant colonies,
but in our Irish colony it was a Church Establishment
question. Some connexion might be traced in Ireland
between the tent and the tabernacle. In our Irish colony
there were at present 22,000 troops, 12,000 pensioners,
end 12,000 constahulary—in round numbers, 44,000 ac-
tive troops in Ireland, nut for the purpose of ministering
to the poverty of the people, but fur the purpose :of
forcing hostile institutions upon the people of that coun-
try. If the lion. Member for Montrose had come down
manfully, and had moved for the reduction of the tem-
poralities of the Irish Church—(Question)—and had
connected it with a motion for the reduction of the troops
in Ireland, he should have supported him. If the mili-
tary f )ree was to be retained at its present amount, ho
would have it all quartered in Ireland, so that the peo-
ple might have the benefit of the money spent by the
troops.—(A laugh.)
Alderman SIDNEY said be was a decided friend to
retrenchment and economy, and should vote for the mo-
tion of the Hon. Member for Montrose. The power of
paying taxes had been greatly lessened by the measures
lately passed by Parliament, and he should vote for this
motion, as ho should for the motion of the Hon. Member
for Surrey to-morrow night.
Lord J. RUSSELL would not enter at all into the
general question whether there should be a reduction of
10,000 men beyond the reduction of 4,000 men proposed
by Government. The statement, however, made by the
lion. Member for Northampt ,n required some notice.
As he understood the Hon. Member, he seemed dis-
posed to lay down the principle, that, as the colonies
were to have self-government, and as this country bad
adopted a free-trade policy, the colonies ought to be 101 l
to themselves for their own defence. Now he (Lord J.

Russell) could not assent to that doctrine. lie was com-
pletely opposed to any excessive or unnecessary military
force in the colonies, as he should be to any excessive

or superfluous force in the United Kingdom; but he
could not consent to lay down the principle that the colo-
nies should rely on their own resources for their defence.
—(lIoar.) He should rather say that we should proportion
our forces to the wants of each colony, according to the
circumstances in which they were placed. With respect
to our military fortresses, such as Gibraltar, Malts, and
the lonian Islands, it had not been denied that the forces
were insufficient. With regard to some of the colonies,
there had been a considerable reduction in the forces, In
Jamaica and in the West Indies generally the force now
was 4,500 less than in 1835, and in Australia consider-
able reductions had been made. The force of 4,000 had
been reduced 2,620, making a reduction of 1,380 men.
Wherever, indeed, reductions could be made it was de-
sirable in his opinion to make them; but there were
occasions when a necessity existed of sending addi-
tional forces to the colonies, and in such cases of avert-
ing danger from the colonies.—(Hear, hear.) Neither
should be think that fortified places in the colonies
ought to be left to be guarded by troops raised by the
colonists. He should be sorry if we were to withdraw
our troops from such a fortress as that of Quebec, and
leave Canada to provide for its own defence.—(llear,
heir.) Without going, therefore, into the general
question, he must decline agreeing to the general
principle laid down by the Hon. Member for Northamp-
ton. Ile should be ready to reduce the number of our
troops in any particular colony, if good reason should be
shown fur so doing. But he could not agree to the
general principle of telling our colonies that they were
not hereof e: to have any assistance from the mother
country.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. V. SMITti said tht t in the argument he had
used he had relish on the communication made by Earl
Grey to Sir 11. Smith, to the effect that in any future
Kafir war the inhabitants of the Cape should rely upon
themselves.

Lord J. RUSSELL said that when his Noble Friend
had written that dispatch ho had not intonded that the
inhabitants of the Care were not to use the troops that
might be in the colony; but had merely meant to state
that they should not expect that this country would
incur a fresh increase of expenditure to meet a Kafir
war. But that case rather confirmed what he (Lord J.
Russell) had said, that each case should stand upon its
own merits. New Z'aland had Rot at present a
representative constitution, although it might have
one in a few years; but this country ought not,
he thought, on that account to withdraw from