ON REDUCTION OF COLONIAL

EXPENDITURE.

APRIL 10, 1851.

[The resolutions were seconded by Mr. Urquhart. The previous question was moved by Mr. Hawes, but the debate stood adjourned before a division could be taken.]

SIR, I must apologise to the House for again bringing under its consideration a subject to which I have repeatedly called its attention in the course of the last two or three years-I mean the amount of the expenditure of this country on account of the colonies. One of my chief reasons for asking the House to reconsider this question is, that there is a strong desire amongst various classes of the community that certain obnoxious taxes should be repealed; in order to repeal them, there is a great wish that our national expenditure should, if possible, be diminished. Can any reduction be made in that expenditure without injury to the interests of the British Empire? The greater portion of that expenditure is on account of the interest of the National Debt, and in that no reduction can be made. The remainder of the national expenditure is on account of the government of the united kingdoms and of the colonies. I will not now express any opinion whether any considerable reduction can be made, and ought to be made, in the expenditure on account of the united kingdoms; but

I must say that I entertain a strong conviction that a considerable portion of our expenditure on account of the colonies is excessive, and that it can be diminished without injury to the interests either of the united kingdoms or of the colonies; and, therefore, I think that steps should be taken to relieve the people, as speedily as possible, from a portion of that burden.

In order to sustain these positions, I will first state, as correctly as I can, the amount of the annual expenditure of this country on account of the colonies. I am sorry that I cannot do so completely and correctly for any period later than the year 1846-47; because no later returns upon which I can rely have been presented to Parliament. Since that period some reductions have been made in our colonial expenditure, for which the Colonial Office deserves credit; but I believe they have been inconsiderable in amount compared to those which, in my opinion, could be made. In the year 1846-47 the expenditure of this country, on account of the colonies, amounted to 3,500,000l. It consisted chiefly of two items: namely, civil expenditure about 500,000l., and military expenditure about 3,000,000l.

I will begin with the military expenditure, under which head I include ordnance and commissariat expenditure. This expenditure has increased very rapidly in the last twenty years. In 1832 it was only 1,800,000l.; in 1835 it became 2,000,000l.; in 1843-44 it amounted to 2,500,000l.; and in 1846-47 to 3,000,000l.; an increase of 1,200,000l. in the interval between 1832 and 1846-47. The sum of 3,000,000l. did not by any means represent the

whole military expenditure of this country on account of the colonies for the year 1846-47 ; it was merely the effective expenditure; that is, the sum actually paid by this country for military services. then being performed in the colonies; or, in other words, the sum required for the pay, clothing, maintenance, and establishments of the 45,700 regular troops, artillerymen, and engineers then serving in the colonies. Besides the effective military expenditure, there is non-effective military expenditure on account of the colonies; that is, the sum annually paid for military services which have been performed in the colonies; I mean the sum paid in the shape of half-pay, pensions, and retiring allowances to the soldiers who have served in the colonies; or, in other words, that portion of the dead-weight which has been produced by the military force which has been maintained on account of the colonies. Therefore, to estimate the whole military cost of the colonies to this country, I must add to 3,000,000l. of effective military expenditure a proportionate amount of the dead-weight. Now, in the year 1846-47, our whole military expenditure, including ordnance and commissariat, amounted to 9,000,000l.; of this sum 6,600,000l. were effective expenditure and 2,400,000l. non-effective; of the 6,600,0ool of effective expenditure I have already said that 3,000,000l., or 5-11ths, were on account of the colonies; I am therefore entitled to infer that 5-11ths of the deadweight, or about 1,000,000l. of it, were also on account of the colonies. So that the whole military cost of the colonies to the united kingdoms in the year 1846-47 must have amounted to 4,000,000l.

To this sum I should be entitled to add a further sum on account of the extra troops which are required to be kept in this country for the purpose of relieving the troops in the colonies; and I will quote high authorities for so doing. The late Sir R. Peel, in making his financial statement for 1845, said:

"The main expense on account of the army is caused by the extent of our colonial possessions. To make no provision for the relief of the troops serving in them would be inconsistent with humanity in the first place, and with prudence in the second. You have thirty-five battalions at home, not, as it is supposed, for the purpose of restraining the population, but for the purpose of maintaining the system of relief for your regiments serving abroad. Your rule is five years at home and ten years abroad for your regiments."

The other night the Secretary at War,' on proposing the army estimates, stated that one of his great arguments for keeping up an effective military force at home was to maintain the system of relief established by Sir R. Peel's Government. According to that system, for every two regiments serving in the colonies one regiment would be required to be maintained at home to afford relief. Last year the military force in the colonies, exclusive of colonial corps, which do not require to be relieved, amounted to about 30,000 men, and that force would consequently require 15,000 men in this country for their relief. I should likewise be entitled to charge to the colonial military account a considerable sum for native wars, rebellions, and 1 Mr. Fox Maule.

If I put nothing down

other extraordinary events. for these two items, I can scarcely be accused of over-estimating the military cost of the colonies to the united kingdoms when I reckon it at not less than 4,000,000l. a year; a sum amounting to about 9s. in the pound sterling on our exports to the colonies in 1849; exceeding by 600,000l. the whole of the local revenues of the colonies for that year, and equal to the sum collected from the windowtax and the excise duties on soap, paper, and hops.

Can any reduction be made in this expenditure? It is evident that no immediate reduction can be made in the 1,000,000l. of dead-weight, for that depends upon the number of troops which have been maintained in the colonies. If, however, the military force there were permanently reduced, ultimately the dead-weight would be reduced. It is only, then, in the 3,000,000l. of effective expenditure that any immediate reduction can be made. How is this sum expended? The greater portion of it is spent on the pay, clothing and maintenance of the troops in the colonies. In the year 1846-47 the military force there consisted of 42,000 regular troops, 3,000 artillerymen, and about 700 engineers, in all 45,700. At present, I believe, the number is about 43,000, exclusive of the reinforcements which have been sent to the Cape of Good Hope. In 1846-47 the pay, clothing and maintenance of the troops in the colonies cost this country about 2,100,000l. These troops were scattered over thirty-seven colonies; in each colony there is one or more stations; in each station there is a commissariat, ordnance, or barrack establishment, and, generally, all three; to these establishments are