Lists (None yet)

Login to create lists

Tagged (None yet)

Add Tags

Comments (None yet)

Add New Comment

No corrections yet


The following is a report of a speech delivered

by Mr. Childers on tho 31st of May, in the House of Commons, on the question of colonial defences, which had arisen incidentally m a debate on the Army Estimâtes. It has boen specially reported tot The Argus -

Mr. CHILDERS -I trust tho right lion, gen- tleman, tho Secretary at War, will adopt the suggestion of the hon. member for Huntingdon (General Peel), and abstain from calling atten- tion, on this occasion, to the military defence of the colonies-a subject which 1 should like to see referred te a select commit- tee. It is a very important question, and in- volves several considerations, and I think de- serves more attention than can be besto ted upon it m a general and casual debate B it, sir, I rue on this occasion to call the attention of tho House to a prehminary matter, the investigation of which, may bo of some advantage when wo come to tho question itself I mean tho manner in which the mditary Estunatcs havo been drawn up for soma years with îespeot to tho military expenditure m the colonies, involving, as thoy do, the expenditure not only by itself of moneys out of the Imperial Exchequer, but nlpo of tho contributions remitted or applied to that purpose by the colonies themselves I think thone Lsti-1 mates should bo drawn up in one of two ways ; either that they should not moko reference at all to the money which comes fiom other sources, or that they should be so drawn up as to show the entire amount of chargo, the con- tributions towards that charge coming from other sources, and the balanco of chargo paid from the Impeual Exchequer I dont know which of these two principles will bo token to be the best. Hie hist would be really rather meagre, the second would perhaps be moro generally sntibfuttory, beeauso it would givo hon membeis tho data and tho infoiniv tion ns to"tho charges under tho expendituio, to whatever class thoy might belong,whethei military or otherwiso Now, sir, the complaint that 1 have to moko does not especially leíate to tho charges of this year, but may bo made equally v>ith regard to tho Estimates of set oral years TnBt. It is a complaint whith has been very much felt m the tolonits, namely, the manner in which the proportion which the colonies boar towards tho mditory expenditure upon them is git en on the Estimates. During the last session of Faihament, I remember the right bon. gentleman, the member for Staffordshire, m stating the amount of tho colonial military ex penditure, was guilty of an mnccuracy m that statement, simply because thora wero no records from j ear to year to show what the real propor- tion between tho colonial and Imperial expendi-

ture was I will stato the exact facts of this

matter, and then I think the House will ngreo that the attention of tho military authorities, nnd of those who prepare the Estimates, ought to bo drawn to the subject I have care- fully gono through tho Lstimates for the lust five or six years in referonco to only ono co lonj- a colony with which I am myself ao Îuamted, and whoio I resided for some years

have been ablo to see copies of tho military Estimates of that colony, and to comparo those EBtimatcB of the local Legislature with the Im- perial Estimates, and they show, during tevornl jenrs, such extraordmaiy disclosures and incon- sistencies, that boforo wo(,o into tho general question of colonial militai y expenditure, 1 ought, 1 think, to bring them beforo the notice or tho Boute I find that, m tho year 1855, largo Bums were appropriated for military cxpondituio in the colonies, and I find the particular colon) to ?which I allude-Viotoiia-appropiioted sorno £200.000 to its military e\pondituro. Tho colony voted ¡£32,000. Tho Imperial pay was £33,000, whilst £53,000 moio was voted from the Impe- rial exchequer for conline;enciCF or extra pat, provisions, and stores for tho regiments stations 1 there, besides the charges for tho colonial forons, which wore considerable On refcinng to tlio Imperial Estimates I find that, in tho year l8 J I, tho only credit which is taken from the colony and that appears in tho Estimates for 1836 7, almost inthe last pa¿c-is theitemtf £5,146, which would appear to bo the solo amount couti lbuttd during the j ear by the colony of Vic'ona towards

itamiutary defences Now, 1 think that, consider- ing that account as the basis upon which wo are asked to voto supplies for tho colonial mihtu y expenditure year by year, tho amount included under that account as "payment into the Exchequer ' for mihtorj purposes, ought to havo been, as I presume it was mtended to bo, tho entire sum paid by tho colony to meet tho amount paid by the Imperial Government for its military purposes. I then go to 18bG 7, and I ii id in thu colonial Estimates foi that year tho sum of £12,000 voted by the Houso for tho staff in Aus- tralia, £33,000 for the regiments stationed in tho colony, and some £12,000 for extra cost of pro- visions I find in tho Imperial Estimates this remarkablo fact, that at the end thero is an express deduction for troops stationed in the Aus- tralian colonies to tho amount of £1,427 only. I then turn to the colonial Estimates. I find that the total t oto by the Legislature of Victoria for this one j ear waB £147,000, of which £3,500 was for the staff at Melbourne, £30 000 for Imperial pay, £31,000 for the colonirl pay of tho troops, and £4D,000 for eontjigencies, undor tote 8. In the Imperial Estimates full provision is mada for tho troopB in Victoria, and the conti l bution fiom tho colony for that year ia

stated at tho insignificant sum of £3,GIS. I Here, therefore, I find that credit is taken, as tho amount which was paid over by the colony, for only the incohsiderablo sum of £3,600 odd, although the amount actually voted was £60,000 or ¿70,000. Tho next year I find the same results. Tho whole sum voted by the colony was ¿£113,000, KB tho colonial expenditure upon the troops. The Imperial Estimates for the year 1857-8 includo the entire provision for tho whole of tho force there, but there is in that year, on tho expendi- ture side, an item of £26,000-that is to say, there nppcai-B in tho Estimates for the year a sum of £20,175 tis having been paid by tho colony. How it is that tho contribution from tho colony is stated that year as £26,175, and only from £3,000 to £5,000 for some years preceding, I am at a loss to understand. After that year, the colony altered to a certain extent its arrange- ments, and, instead of including the details of the vote upon each division of the army expendi- ture, in consequence of somo changes, which I will allude to when the general question comes forward, they adopted another plan, and voted an exact sum j and I may stato to tho Houso, in passing, what that sum was, and what woro the terms on which it WOB voted. For the threo following years the colony voted £38,075, £26,807, and £40,447 respectively ; tho teims on which it was voted being as follows : " Allowance to be granted to Her Majesty for tho head-quarter staff and Her Majesty's troops in Victoria, to bo paid to tho officer commandint» the forces, and to bo distributed by him in such mcnnervas to Her Majesty may seem fit." I think that was a distinct contribution from tim general revenue of Victoria, and the Bum ought to have appeared in a distinct form in tho ac- counts, limd in that particular year-that is, in 1858-9-that no notico of this appears in the Im- perial Estimates, and the contributions from Vic- toria aro given as £5,136, and nil in 1859-69, although the sum voted in the latter year was £26,897 to tho head-quarter staff-four or fivo companies and their contingencies-and the sum of £19,750 to meet the expense of whatever addi- tional expenses were necessary for the high price of provisions, grain, &c, making a total of £46,647 towards tho military oxpenscs of the colony. In the Imperial-Estimates, I find in that part which relates to the sum paid into the Ex- chequer in the year 1859-60, no sum what- ever as paid in by the colony to which I re- fer. Whether tho amount is included in the sums voted from any other colony, I am not ablo to say, but as it is specially referred to in previous years, I think there is no ground for its emission in this particular year. My object in alluding to this subject is to call the attention of the Government and of tho Houso to tho neces- sity of Bhowing clearly in their militaryEbtim ates tho sums of money voted for tho future by the colonies, so that beforo we go into tho question of the general expenditure, wo moy havo the facts clearly before us, that wo may know what the colonies contributo, and that wo should havo a sound basis for determining the general qucs tiens tp which the bon. and gallant gentleman opposito bos referred. (Hear, hear.) I may add, that' the variations in tho sums voted for extra allowances on account of the high price of provisions, &c, ore inexplicable. They arc, for 1856-7, £12,130; for 1S57-8, £4,587; and for Mil Estimates for tho three following years, £1,201, £5,259, and £11,625 respectively. But theso votes, nor votes (8) for provisions, mention



Sergeant Whitworth, master gunner of Sandown] Fort, in tho Isle of Wight, i:r.s Blain his wild end six children, and ¡uuniptcd to destroy hitan self. The scene in his quarters wa.) most BIMCI -; icg. The woman nudlhrco of tho children lud leen murdered in their sleep, their throats had been mortally cut with a íazor or cutlass ; bat cne of the littlo children had evidently run ubeut tho room during the perpetration of tho murders, for the solea of its feet wero stained with blood. Whitworth having failed to k11 himself, reported tho murders at tho officers' quarters, where ho talked in a mosi incoherent manner, and seemed to bo labouring under some inexplicable delusion. A coroner's juiy inquired into the facts, and delivered tho following- sin- gular verdict :-" Wo are agreed to a verdict that William Henry Whitworth is guilty of tha .wilful murder of his wife and six 'children ; and

the.jury at the somo time wish to add, if tho3 may be allowed to do BO. for tho sako of their! neighbours and tho locality, that they aro of opinion that tho man was insane at that time.'T Whitworth was to bo tried at the Winchester)