the country; and they were bound to adopt every economical recommendation, and more especially when such were sanctioned by the investigation of one of their own committees. The chancellor of the exchequer had a few nights ago led them to believe that there would be a saving of upwards of 1,000,000l. sterling in the estimates for the year. After looking at these estimates, he could not see where such a saving was to be effected. The estimates for the army this year were stated at 6,643,9681.; but he begged the House to recollect that the sum was only two-thirds of what they would be called on to vote before the termination of the session. Last year the estimates amounted to 6,897,000l.; but if any hon. gentleman looked at the act of appropriation, he would find that the several sums voted last year for the army amounted to more than 9,000,000l. there being here à difference of 3,000,000l. voted away in driblets, after the regular estimates had passed the House. It was indeed a fact worth notice, that nearly fifty votes had been taken for the military establishment of the country. Hon. gentlemen might perhaps suppose that the 6,000,000l. standing on the estimates was all that they would be called upon to vote for the army; but he now warned them that before the close of the session they would find 9,000,000l. required for the military department alone, exclusively of the Ordnance, which ought to be an item of the military establishment. His object was to make the charges of the army at present approximate as nearly as possible to that of 1792. It appeared that corn was now at the same price as in 1792, and he saw no reason why there should not also be something like equality in the expenditure. In the year 1792, there were 15,919 men for Great Britain, and 17,323 for the colonies. In Ireland the House of Commons voted at first 12,000 men, and afterwards 3,232 were added, so that there were in all in Ireland 15,232 men and officers. In Great Britain, Ireland, and the colonies, 48,474. At present, we had in Great Britain 27,852 regulars; in the colonies 32,476; and in Ireland 20,778, making a total of 81,106. He entreated the attention of the House to the fact, that we had at present 32,632 men more than in 1792. He was willing to make an allowance of 12,000 men more now for the extended establishments of the country; but still At present we he found a surplus of 20,000 regular troops. He would not recommend the reduction of such a large force at once; but he would certainly wish to see 10,000 men reduced, which would allow 12,000 men for the colonies, 2,000 for reliefs, and leave a surplus of 10,000 beyond the year 1792, an allowance sufficiently liberal. In 1792, the number of the artillery was 3,730, and from 4,000 to 5,000 marines. He found no charge made in that year for staff-militia, and, therefore, he did not know whether they were embodied or not; but he should suppose that all the militia called out in 1793 were ready to be organized in 1792; and, joining them to the artillery, he found a force of 25,757 irregular troops, as he would call them. had 7,872 in the Ordnance department, while the marines had been augmented to 8,000. By an estimate he held in his hand, he found that we had at present 51,998 militia. In Great Britain there were 37,391 yeomanry and volunteers ready to be called out, and in Ireland 20,231 volunteers. Taking, therefore, the whole of these, we had in the United Kingdom a force of 125,492 men in arms, or ready to be called out. Let the House then compare the establishment of 1821 with that of 1792, and let those gentlemen who complained of agricultural distress, consider whether it was not their duty to reduce the public expenditure, and thus lighten the public burthens. Bearing these estimates in view, it was impossible that any gentleman could have economy at heart, and not vote for a reduction of the military force. He would next call their attention to the unavailable part of the military force, comprising the life-guards, the horseguards, the foot-guards, the dragoonguards, and the dragoons; and as these were the most expensive regiments in the service, he believed the House would agree with him in thinking, that there was no reason why there should at present be nearly double the number of life-guards and foot-guards that had been found hecessary in 1792. horse-guards were increased by 360 men The life-guards and since 1792; the dragoon-guards, in 1792, were 696 in 1821 they were 2,668 men, being an increase of 1,972; the dragoons in 1792 were 2,080-in 1821 they were 5,152, being an increase of 3,072; the foot-guards in 1821 were 5,760—in 1792 they had been 3,126-the increase was page of the returns on the table, and they 2,634. He begged to observe, that none of these troops could be sent to the co-would find the increase enormous. They lonies; they were chiefly confined to the duties of the metropolis, in which there was an unnecessary number of guards and sentinels. In 1792 there were in the metropolis 363 men, horse and foot, employed in the guards of the metropolis, relieving 159 sentinels; in 1816 (the time when the last return had been made) there were 936 men on guard, affording 238 sentinels. The expense of the troops who did this duty was much greater than that of troops of the line. The expense of the life-guards was 70l. per man; of the dragoons, 481. 10s.; of the footguards, 34.; of the infantry of the line, 31. He should have no hesitation, therefore, in proposing a considerable reduction in the horse-guards, life-guards, and dragoons; because, even if they were not more expensive in time of peace, they were less efficient, as they could not serve in colonial garrisons, He should, before parliament separated, move for an account of the average expense of supporting regiments of the guards as well as regiments of the line. He had no hesitation in stating, that even if the guards were kept up with the same economy as regiments of the line, still the duty would be more efficiently performed by the latter. In saying this he meant no reflection whatever on the horse or life-guards, he was aware that no men had conducted themselves with greater bravery and gallantry than the guards in our late campaigns on the continent. What he meant to say was, that the horse-guards were not equally available for public service with regiments of the line. For instance, we could not, in a case of emergency, send the guards to Ceylon, the Mauritius, or the West Indies. They were only fitted for home duty, and that duty, too, which was of the least public worth that was, show and parade. The amount of those troops was three times as much now as it was in the year 1792, and being supported at an enormous expense, went to swell considerably the general account, which it was his object to reduce. Having said thus much of the army, he now came to another branch of our expenditure, which had increased to a large amount within a few years; he meant the military staff. Indeed, the increase which had taken place in all our public establishments was almost incredible. Let any member open any would, for instance, find many clerks retired upon an allowance as half-pay which was sufficient to support any independent gentleman. In the War-office department they would find such items as 1,400l. a year to the first clerk, 1,000l. to another, 800l. to another, and so on. He would ask, whether such extravagance was to be allowed in the public expenditure, at a period when every branch of our industry was suffering under great privations? He maintained, that under such circumstances we ought to exert our selves to bring our military establishment down to the standard of 1792. According to the appropriation act of 1792, the expense of the regular and irregular troops of Great Britain amounted to 1,814,800%. The expense for Ireland during the same year, was 516,3491. making together a sum of 2,331,1497; while the total sum for the present year was 9,500,2161. showing an increase of 7,169,0671. Was it fit, then, that the House should go into a committee of supply without coming to a resolution on the gross amount of these estimates? It might be said, that in stating this excess, he had not looked at the charge of the non-effective force. He admitted that the expense under this head amounted in 1792 to no more than 500,000l. while at present it was 2,000,000l.; and consequently this accounted for a part of the increase which had taken place in the estimates. But he contended that, taking the aggregate amount for the years 1792 and 1821, there was a positive increase of 7,000,000%. exclusive of the non-effective force. As to the plan of the noble lord, for reducing the number of men in each battalion instead of reducing whole battalions, he must say that such a mode of reduction was not only contrary to the opinions of the best judges, but contrary to the opinion which the noble lord himself had expressed on a former occasion. The noble lord had in 1817, submitted a proposition to the finance committee, in which he maintained that 8,000 men might be kept up in the form of 10 battalions, for 74,000l. a year less than it would cost to keep up the same number in the form of 20 battalions; and, therefore, upon the noble lord's own principle, if the 93 regiments of 650 rank and file each, which formed our present establishment, were thrown into 75 regiments, of 800 rank and file each, there would be a reduction of expense to the amount of 212,000. He knew that there were persons who differed altogether from him upon the merits of that system of arrangement, and who said " let us have skeletons of regiments for the convenience of rapid filling up;" but surely 75 regiments of 1,000 men each, with the aid of second battalions giving a force of 150,000 men, would be sufficient for any emergency. It was objected, that there were legal difficulties in the way of the course which he advocated-that men could not legally be drafted from one regiment to another; but why not adopt the measure pursued in India, and suffer men to volunteer from one corps to another encouraging them by small bounties or by the hope of promotion? He would now briefly take notice of the Staff, a department throughout which,in the committee, he intended to insist upon reduction. It was almost too much to look back to the cost of the Staff in the year 1792, only 6,4271.; and to advert to the amount at the present day, 28,4851.; giving a difference of 21,958. Of this enormous increase 15,7821. was to be traced to the commander in chief's office, an office which did not exist in 1792 or 1794; and he meant no reflection upon the royal duke at the head of that office, nor upon those who acted under him; for he thought that the duty at the Horse Guards was done as well as that of any office under government; but still he called for reduction, because the thing, however well done, was done upon too expensive a scale. But, he should go farther, and look at the expense of the staff maintained abroad. The expense of the staff in the West Indies, North America, and the Mediterranean, in 1792, was 17,000l.; in 1802, it amounted to 19,935l.; and in the year 1820 it stood increased to 82,5291. being, for the old colonies, which formerly cost 19,935l., 51,490l. and for the new colonies 31,039. Now, considering that England was at peace with all the world, that she was in a situation to reap, if she could ever reap, the advantages resulting from the treaties and alliances which the noble lord opposite had so fortunately brought to bear, certainly she could not need even so heavy an establishment as she had maintained in 1802. Of what advantage was peace, if we were to continue keeping up our war establishment? To him it appeared that the truest and the cheapest mode of defending our colonies was to give them an interest in defending themselves; to get rid of the system which refused to our fellow subjects of the colonies the birthright of Britons. What had been our policy? We had refused to the Mauritius, to Ceylon, to Trinidad, and to Malta, the privileges and protection of the British constitution. Did the noble lord recollect the noble defence made by about 500 Dutch troops when the Cape of Good Hope was first attacked by several British ships of war? Did the noble lord suppose that Englishmen would fight less bravely on a similar occasion? No: but the difference was this, the Dutch had their rights and privileges to fight for, while our colonists have no such rights to defend. The only privilege of this constitution which had been extended was the trial by jury to Ceylon, and even that concession went far to tranquillize the minds of the inhabitants. He had on a former occasion stated, that our new colonies ought to pay for the protection afforded to them; and so they would, if they were not obliged to pay 10,000l. to one man, 5,000l. to another, and so on. This money was paid, in great part, to sinecurists and pensioners, sent out from this country by government influence. In page 6 of the army estimates was to be found a single item of 1,048,000l. for paying and clothing of colonial troops. Before we got possession of those colonies they supported themselves; when we got possession of them, not only did they absorb the whole of their revenues, but they became a drain upon this country. What else could be expected, when they were obliged to pay thousands to men who did not reside in them, and to boys who had never seen or perhaps heard of them? He was not one who would advise the giving up of any one of our colonies; but he would have them made to contribute to their own support. The hon. member proceeded to state the expenses of the new colonies when we first got possession of them with what they now cost, and contended that, unless the present system was altered we should lose, rather then derive advantage from them. Adverting to the expense of hospitals, he observed, that the expense under that head in 1792 was 23,450l. whereas at present it amounted to 132,484. The war department, consisting, in 1796, of twenty-one clerks, cost 8,2271.;-on the militia, and marines) consists of 81,106 officers and men'; namely, of 27,852 in Great Britain, Guernsey, &c.; 32,476 in the colonies abroad; and 20,778 in Ireland. The question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the motion" was then put and agreed to. The Speaker was about to put the question for his leaving the chair, Mr. Hume said that he had intended to allow a negative to pass against his two first resolutions, and to divide the House upon the third. Under the present circumstances, however, he did not clearly see how that measure was to be carried into effect. The Speaker said that the House having decided that the words proposed to be omitted should form part of the question, that question must be put to the House. Mr. Tierney thought that the value of the resolutions proposed by his hon. friend would be lost by the course just proposed. At that late hour it would be out of all question, to go into the army estimates. The better way would be, to adjourn, and so give his hon. friend an opportunity of shaping his motion on this important subject. an average of the last 10 or 12 years, it cost upwards of 60,000l. a-year. The office of the secretary of war now consisted of two departments, one for correspondence and accounts, which cost 34,118/.; the other for making up what were called Sir R. Wilson, in seconding the amendthe arrear accounts. The business of ment, coincided with his hon. friend in his the office having been in arrear, it was views of general retrenchment, but de thought better to appoint a separate de-precated any sudden diminution of the partment to make up those accounts, and military force of the country. let the other clerks go on with the usual business. It was given in evidence before the military commission, that the arrear accounts could be all made up in three years; now, though several years had elapsed, they were still unfinished; and would continue so as long as that House voted the sum proposed for paying that department. He, for one, was of opinion, that these accounts ought not to be brought up: he thought it too bad, that widows and orphans should be now called upon to account for the acts of their husbands and fathers, or for the negligence of government; he was convinced that the collection was productive of much vexation and hardship to the parties from whom it was taken. Suppose he had been a paymaster, and had tendered his accounts, which had been refused by government, would it not be too hard to call upon him at the end of 30 years, for those accounts, when, perhaps, it would be difficult, if not impossible, for him to make them out? He thought that no account of more than ten or fifteen years standing ought to be called in. Little saving could be made by the money called in, as the office it. self cost the country 17,1361. a year. The hon. member, after enumerating several other considerable items of expenditure in the War-office and military staff, concluded by observing, that it was unfair, when such opportunities for retrenchment offered, to call upon the country, pressed as she was by mutiplied distresses, to support so large an expenditure. He then moved to leave out from the word "That" to the end of the question, in order to add the words, "That it appears, by the official returns before this House, that the total military establishment of Great Britain and Ireland for 1792 (exclusive of the East Indies, and of the artillery, militia and marines), consisted of 48,474 men, namely, 15,919 for Great Britain, Guernsey, &c.; 17,323 in the colonies abroad; and 15,282 in Ireland; and, that the total military establishment of Great Britain and Ireland for 1821 (exclusive of India, The question "that the Speaker do leave the chair" was then put and negatived, and the committee was deferred till Monday. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Monday, March 12. Mr. ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.] Butterworth, on presenting a Petition against the Claims of the Catholics, from the parish of St. Dunstan's, London, said, that having been unable to attend the late debates upon this subject, he would briefly mention some of his reasons for concurring with the present petition. With all possible respect for the motives of those who supported the resolutions, he conceived them to be grounded on mistaken principles. It was not because Roman Catholics held the doctrines of transubstantiation, the adoration of the Virgin Mary, and the sacrifice of the mass, &c. that our ancestors excluded them from high offices and seats in parliament; but on account of their intolerant spirit in civil and religious Ordered to lie on the table. affairs, and their dangerous acknowledg-poral authority, nor become property of ment of a foreign supreme jurisdiction a Protestant church. He, therefore, over this country. The oaths and decla- thought that a general commutation for rations were a mere test to ascertain who tithes should at least precede any conceswere Roman Catholics. Although this sion of the Roman Catholic claims; but was not a subject of clamour out of doors, as a sincere friend to civil and religious yet it would be much more lastingly felt liberty, he must confess himself opposed than the evanescent politics of the day. If to the admission of Roman Catholics to the bills now before the House should pass political power. into law, they would transfer discontent from Ireland to the Protestant population of this country, as well as afford great dissatisfaction to the Protestants there. He entertained no fear for the stability of the Protestant religion, even if it were separated from the state, because he believed it to be founded upon the principles of eternal truth; but as the Protestant church and the state were in this country united, he should deeply lament if what God, by his providence, had joined together, should, by the adoption of the measures now before parliament, be put asunder. But if Roman Catholics were to change their intolerant principles, and renounce the supremacy of the pope, he, for one, should have no objection to their possessing political power, notwithstanding the peculiar doctrines of their church. The spirit of that church was, however, evident, from various documents issued by the present pope. He should only instance one, viz. the instructions of that pontiff to his nuncio at Vienna, in 1805, in which he maintains the pretended right of deposing heretical princes, and deplores the misfortunes of those times, which, as he says, prevent the spouse of Jesus' Christ (the church) from putting those holy maxims into practice, and constrain her to suspend the course of her just severities against the enemies of the faith. The petition alluded to the Jesuits' college established in Lancashire. That order had been revived by the present pope, although it had been found so dangerous to the peace and well-being of society, that it had been put down by the common consent of all the courts of Europe. He conceived that Roman Catholics, if they possessed political power, never would consent to pay tithes in support of a Protestant ministry, which they considered as belonging to an heretical church. As tithes were before the Reformation in the hands of the Roman Catholics themselves, and had been looked upon by them as the patrimony of St. Peter, they could not, in their opinion, be alienated by any temVOL. IV. ARMY ESTIMATES.] Mr. Hume stated, that he had on a former night submitted certain resolutions to the House, but the forms of the House prevented them from being entered on the Journals, and he was anxious that his opinion on this subject should be put upon record. He would therefore offer them now, without any further observation than that they contained only matters of fact, and pledg ed the House to no immediate extent of reduction, but only to the general principle of economy. He would move, "That there were in the service of Great Britain and Ireland in 1792 (exclusive of the regular cavalry and infantry) 25,757 troops; namely, 3,730 of royal artillery, 4,425 of the royal marines, and 17,602 of disembodied militia; and in 1821 (exclusive of regular cavalry and infantry) the number of 125,492 troops; namely, 7,872 engineers and artillery, 8,000 royal marines, 51,998 disembodied militia, and 57,622 yeomanry cavalry and volunteer infantry, being in number a larger force by 132,367 men, available for purposes government in the year 1821, than the government had in 1792; that the supplies for the expense of the military establishment of Great Britain and Ireland in 1792 were 2,331,149/.; that the supplies voted for the military establishment of Great Britain and Ireland for 1820 were 9,500,216.; that the army estimates for 1821, now submitted to the House, are only 163,4987. less than those of 1820: and that it is the opinion of this House, that under the present circumstances of the country, it is expedient to adopt measures to effect a large reduction in the number and expenditure of its military establishments, and to approximate as near as possible to the establishment of 1792, as recommended by the finance committee of 1817." of Lord Castlereagh, before he gave his vote upon the question, wished to know what was the object of the hon. member in submitting his resolution to the House. 4 G |