The Statesman.
London, England, 1815-03-01 00:00:00

MILITIA.

Sir S. ROMILLY.—No apology was due from
him for bringing on this subject again, even if the
matter had stood as it did before. Ile was justified
by the importance of the subject : hut, in fact, it
did not stand now as it did. On the former occa.
sion, only five months had elapsed since the defini-
tive 'treaty of Peace in Europe, and the Negocia.
lions at Ghent were still going on with, as it appear-
ed, from our pretensions, no great hopes of peace.
Now, nine months had passed since the general
peace of Europe; the Negociations at Ghent had
happily terminated in peace, and there seemed little
reason to apprehend the renewal of war. All that
had passed, exemplified the doctrines that had been
maintained on the former occasion. It was then
said on the other side, that it remained with the
Crown alone to decide when, and under what sir.
cumstances, the Militia should be disbanded. Certain.
ly some of the Militia regiments had been disbanded,
but others were yet kept up, though there was no
foreign war, nor any symptom of insurrection nr re.
bellion at home. The extreme importance of this
subject must hare forced itself on every Gentleman's
mind. The hlilitia occasioned a very severe sacrifice
on the part of the lower orders, by the exaction of
personal service, their separation from their families
and homes, the forcing them to follow a new line of
life, and the depriving them of the advantages of the
civil law, and compelling them to subject themselves
to military law. To persons of opulence it was lit-
tle more than a pecuniary tax. These sacrifices
should only be required by the exigencies of the
State. Our predecessors had thought such imposi-
tions only justifiable in cases of immediate danger ;
such as a threatened invasion, or an actual insurrec-
tion or rebellion. The Legislature had imposed on
the Crown in this respect unusual restraints, by re-
quiring the publication of the grounds of the mea-
sure. The Proclamation must state what the occa-
sion is : and if Parliament be not sitting, it must be
called for the express purpose of making the requi-
site communication to them. With all humility to-
v ards those whose opinions were better entitled to
weight than his own, he must say, that at this mo-
ment, in these circumstances, it was contrary to law
to require the Militia service ; and that that part of
the Militia recently disbanded, had been up to the
period of each disbanding illegally detained. It re-
quired not the knowledge of a profound lawyer,
but merely a knowledge of the Constitution, and
plain good sense, to understand a modern Act of
Parliament involved in no technical difficulties.—
Every County Member was as good a judge of it as
the Crown Lawyers themselves. Before he proceed-
ed farther, he must protest against the consequences
imputed to the doctrines he maintained, that the
men, under such opinions, might have a right to
quit their standards. But, though the conduct of
Ministers in keeping the Militia embodied were
grossly illegal, lie acknowledged that the men were
bound to discharge their duties. lie desired to dis-
claim those alarming consequences which had been
imputed to his arguments. Without going into the
history of the Militia from the earliest times, he
would merely state, that the King never had power
to call for the personal services of his subjects except
In cases of actual invasion and rebellion. The Act of
Edward 111. declared, that no man should be. com-
pelled to go out of his county, unless when necessity
required, and in case of strangers invading the coun-
try. The preamble of the Act of the 42d of the
present King, chap. 90, stated, that it was of im-
portance to the internal defence of the realm, that
the Militia should be embodied ; and the 111th sec-
tion enacted, that in all cases of actual invasion, or
in danger thereof, or in case of insurrection or rebel-
lion, it should be lawful for his Majesty to draw
out and embody the Militia. There was no declare.
lion of the time when the Militia should be disem.
bodied ; but the Legislature had thought proper to
impose restraints on the prerogative of the Crown.--
It had been said, that the King having once called
out this force, might afterwards keep it embodied
during his pleasure ; ■nd the only answer which 111i-
nisters gave was, that they were responsible for
their advice. lie maintained, however, that every
low ought to be interpreted, not according to the
strict letter, but agreeably to its true intent and mean-
ing. When all the causes of calaoo out the Militia

ceased, there was no ground for keeping it embodied.
—The Crown, no doubt, had great discretion in
judging when those causes ceased ; but if it were clear
to every man, that every cause had ceased, there was
no longer any ground for the exercise of such discre-
tion. if Ministers would say, that there was any
danger of invasion, or that there existed any rebel-
lion or insurtection in the country, they would then
be justified in keeping this national force embodied ;
but they could not pretend, that any of those cases',
existed, for there was not the smallest danger of in-
vasion, and there had been scarcely a period in his
• Majesty's reign hi which the country was more tran-
quil than at the present moment. He repeated, there-
' fore, that it was not only a rule of law, but also a
maxim of common sense, that cessanle cause!, tessat
• Tech's. It. had been urged, however, that there
was a construction of this law by usage; and that
while a war continued the probability of invasion
was to be inferred. But this construction could not
be maintained ; for he defied his Majesty's advisers
to produce an instance where the Militia had been
kept embodied, except in time of actual war, and
when the enemy threatened to invade our coasts.—
At the conclusion of the last war, the Ministers of
that day did not keep the Militia embodied. And
yet, what were the circumstances under which that
peace was made ? Did any man acquainted with the
situation of the country think that it was likely to
be of long duration ? Could it be forgotten, that
the man who was then at the head of the French Go-
vernment, under the modest title of First Consul,
, had made alliances with different Powers, and che-
trished the most inveterate hatred towards this coun-
try ! And yet, with the knowledge of all these
• circumstances, within a fortnight after the news of
the definitive Treaty of Peace having been signed
had reached this country, the Secretary of War con-
sidered it expedient to bring in a law to augment the
I Militia. The Noble Lord, in whose department this
' matter rested, was then at the head of the Adminis•
tration ; but neither he, nor those who acted with
him, dared. to give such interpretation to the
law as they now thought proper to advance.
---At present they entertained a different opi-
nion ; and perhaps they thought that the exults-
tion which the last peace had produced, would
be a good opportunity for imposing additional bur-
thefts on the people, 'and calling on them to make
fresh sacrifices. Ile did not know whether they en-
-1 tertained such notions, but this he would say, that
1 till the present period his Majesty's Ministers had
never ventured to give such construction to the law.
IHe had seen the opinions of the Crown Lawyers,
which were avowed by Ministers, and said to speak
1 their language. Ile must beg leave, however, to
I call the attention of the House to the subject of pub-
! fishing the law of the land by the opinion of the Law
' Officers. This, he contended, was quite a new.
practice; and he would add, that the opinions of
his Majesty's Attorney, and Solicitor-General were
not entitled to any more authority than those of any
other two Barristers who had not the same adven-
ttage of the Royal favour. The opinions of such
. persons would, indeed, be entitled to more conside-
ration, because they would not be given under any
bias. But it appeared, that the opinions of the At-
! torney and Solicitor-General were to be taken de-
-1 claratory of the law, mid that the Colonels of regi-
ments were to read them at the head of their men, in
order to remove all doolos upon the subject. But
what would the House think of this matter ? Ile
would refer to the case of raising ship-money under
the reign of Charles I. Did they suppose, that if
the opinion of Sir John Finch, who was then At.
i torney-Genera!, had been taken on that measure,
I that it would have been satisfactory to the nation ?
I It was extremely improper, that the law should be
! received, not from the Judges, but from those who
were to act the part of advocates for the Crown.—
He was well aware that these opinions came with
more weight to the country, since they werb the
opinions not of the Attorney and So!icitor-General
only, but also of the Chief Justice of Chester—
I [[leer!]—who might have to decide on this very law
' in his judicial character. It was therefore the opinion
I
of a Judge, given at the instance of his Majesty's
Ministers.-111ear, hear!]—But how had those Ali-
. nisters acted ? They had first taken their measures
and then asked for advice; they had kept the Militia
embodied, and then enquired whether they were im-
peachable for what they had done ? Could any man
i suppose that they would not take great pains to pro.
cure an opinion favourable to themselves? With re-
I spect to the opinion of the Chief Justice of Chester,
he would repeat, that it ought not to have been
given, since a Judge ought not to give au opinion
1 till he had heard the whole matter in dispute, and
attended to the arguments of the contending parties.
I But the circular letter from the Secretary of State to
the Colonels of Militia said, that some doubts having
Ibeen expressed as to the legality of keeping the
militia embodied, the question had been referred to
the Attorney and Solicitor-General, and the law
being thus ascertained, the Colonels were to read it
at the head of their regiments, for the purpose of sa-
-1 tisfying the minds of their men. The two first lion;
of that answer were, however, not a little remark. !
lable. "We have had the honour," said the Attor.l
ney and Solicitor-General, " to receive your Lord. ,
ship's letter of yesterday's date.:' Now lie thought, !
I that it would have been proper to take more time
I I than twenty-four hours to look into the old law
upon the subject, and to ascertain the extent of the
I prerogative of the Crown. The question which Mi-
nisters had asked was, whether it was imperative on
the Crown, under any circumstances, to disembody
the militia ? and the opinion said, there was nothing
imperative in the Act; that there was a discretion in
his Majesty's Ministers, subject to responsibility, if
1 they advised the Crown to continue the militia ern-
! bodied improperly, when the circumstances of the
country did not make it expedient. We had often
heard of necessity being urged in defence of an ille-
gal measure : but that was the tyrant's plea ; and
therefore, instead of necessity, we had here the word
1 expediency; so that as long as Ministers should
think it expedient to detain men from their families,
iand subject them to all the severities of martial law,
there was no remedy but the responsibility of the ad-
visers of the Crown. But was this a sufficient answer
Ito the people ? In what time, he asked, in w hat
`country, under what arbitrary Government, were not
Ministers responsible? Was it because Ministers
were said to be responsible; that the militia were to be