Argus (Melbourne, Vic. : 1848 - 1957), Tuesday 14 August 1860, page 7


COLONIAL DEFENCES.

The following is a report of a speech delivered

by Mr. Childers on the 31st of May, in the House of Commons, on the question of colonial defences, which had arisen incidentally in a debate on the Army Estimates. It has been specially reported to The Argus -

Mr. CHILDERS -I trust the right hon. gentleman, the Secretary at War, will adopt the suggestion of the hon. member for Huntingdon (General Peel and abstain from calling attention, on this occasion, to the military defence of the colonies a subject which I should like to see referred to a select committee. It is a very important question, and involves several considerations, and I think deserves more attention than can be bestowed upon it in a general and casual debate But sir, I rue on this occasion to call the attention of the House to a preliminary matter, the investigation of which, may be of some advantage when we come to the question itself I mean the manner in which the military Estimates have been drawn up for some years with respect to the military expenditure in the colonies, involving, as they do, the expenditure not only by itself of moneys out of the Imperial Exchequer, but also of the contributions remitted or applied to that purpose by the colonies themselves I think there still mates should be drawn up in one of two ways ; either that they should not make reference at all to the money which comes from other sources, or that they should be so drawn up as to show the entire amount of charge, the contributions towards that charge coming from other sources, and the balance of charge paid from the Imperial Exchequer I don't know which of these two principles will be taken to be the best. The first would be really rather meagre, the second would perhaps be more generally satisfactory, because it would give hon members the data and the informer tion as to the charges under the expenditure, to whatever class they might belong, whether military or otherwise Now, sir, the complaint that I have to make does not especially relate to the charges of this year, but may be made equally with regard to the Estimates of several years TnBt. It is a complaint which has been very much felt in the colonies, namely, the manner in which the proportion which the colonies boar towards the military expenditure upon them is given on the Estimates. During the last session of Parliament, I remember the right hon. gentleman, the member for Staffordshire, in stating the amount of the colonial military expenditure, was guilty of an inaccuracy in that statement, simply because there were no records from year to year to show what the real proportion between the colonial and Imperial expenditure

was I will state the exact facts of this

matter, and then I think the House will agree that the attention of the military authorities, and of those who prepare the Estimates, ought to be drawn to the subject I have carefully gone through the Estimates for the last five or six years in reference to only one to long- a colony with which I am myself as quainted, and where I resided for some years

have been able to see copies of the military Estimates of that colony, and to compare those Estimates of the local Legislature with the Imperial Estimates, and they show during several years, such extraordinary disclosures and inconsistencies, that before wore into the general question of colonial military expenditure, 1 ought, I think, to bring them before the notice of the House I find that, in the year 1855, large sums were appropriated for military expenditure in the colonies, and I find the particular colony to which I allude-Viotoiia-appropiioted some £200.000 to its military expenditure. The colony voted ¡£32,000. The Imperial pay was £33,000, whilst £53 000 more was voted from the Imperial exchequer for contingencies or extra pat, provisions, and stores for the regiments stations 1 there, besides the charges for the colonial forces, which were considerable On referring to the Imperial Estimates I find that, in the year 18 J I, the only credit which is taken from the colonyand that appears in the Estimates for 1836 7, almost in the last page is threatened £5,146, which would appear to be the solo amount could build during the year by the colony of Victoria towards

insanitary defences Now, I think that, consider-ing that account as the basis upon which we are asked to vote supplies for the colonial militia y expenditure year by year, the amount included under that account as payment into the Exchequer for military purposes, ought to have been, as I presume it was intended to be, the entire sum paid by the colony to meet the amount paid by the Imperial Government for its military purposes. I then go to 1856 7, and I it is in the colonial Estimates for that year the sum of £12,000 voted by the House for the staff in Australia, £33,000 for the regiments stationed in the colony, and some £12,000 for extra cost of provisions I find in the Imperial Estimates this remarkable fact, that at the end there is an express deduction for troops stationed in the Australian colonies to the amount of £1,427 only. I then turn to the colonial Estimates. I find that the total score by the Legislature of Victoria for this one year was £147,000, of which £3,500 was for the staff at Melbourne, £30,000 for Imperial pay, £31 000 for the colonial pay of the troops, and £4,000 for contingencies, under late 8. In the Imperial Estimates full provision is made for the troops in Victoria, and the conti lbution from the colony for that year is

stated at the insignificant sum of £3,GIS. I Here, therefore, I find that credit is taken, as the amount which was paid over by the colony, for only the inconsiderable sum of £3,600 odd, although the amount actually voted was £60,000 or £70,000. The next year I find the same results. The whole sum voted by the colony was ¿£113,000, KB the colonial expenditure upon the troops. The Imperial Estimates for the year 1857-8 include the entire provision for the whole of the force there, but there is in that year, on the expenditure side, an item of £26,000 that is to say, there appears in the Estimates for the year a sum of £20,175 as having been paid by the colony. How it is that the contribution from the 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 arrangements, and, instead of including the details of the vote upon each division of the army expenditure, in consequence of some 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 state to the House, in passing, what that sum was, and what were the terms on which it was voted. For the three following years the colony voted £38,075, £26,807, and £40,447 respectively the terms on which it was voted being as follows: " Allowance to be granted to Her Majesty for the head-quarters staff and Her Majesty's troops in Victoria, to be paid to the officer commanding the forces, and to be distributed by him in such mannered to Her Majesty may seem fit. I think that was a distinct contribution from the general revenue of Victoria, and the Bum ought to have appeared in a distinct form in the accounts, land in that particular year-that is, in 1858-9-that no notice of this appears in the Imperial Estimates, and the contributions from Victoria are given as £5,136, and all in 1859-69, although the sum voted in the latter year was £26,897 to the headquarter staff four or five companies and their contingencies and the sum of £19,750 to meet the expense of whatever additional expenses were necessary for the high price of provisions, grain, etc, making a total of £46,647 towards the military expenses of the colony. In the Imperial Estimates, I find in that part which relates to the sum paid into the Exchequer in the year 1859-60, no sum whatever as paid in by the colony to which I refer. Whether the amount is included in the sums voted from any other colony, I am not able to say, but as it is specially referred to in previous years, I think there is no ground for its omission in this particular year. My object in alluding to this subject is to call the attention of the Government and of the House to the necessity of showing clearly in their militaryEbtim ates the sums of money voted for the future by the colonies, so that before we go into the question of the general expenditure, we may have the facts clearly before us, that we may know what the colonies contribute, and that we should have a sound basis for determining the general questions to which the hon. and gallant gentleman opposite bas referred. (Hear, hear.) I may add, that the variations in the sums voted for extra allowances on account of the high price of provisions, &c, ore inexplicable. They are, for 1856-7, £12,130; for 1857-8, £4,587; and for MR. Estimates for the three following years, £1,201, £5,259, and £11,625 respectively. But neitherthese votes, nor votes (8 for provisions, mention

Victoria.

MURDER OPAWlFEAND SIX CHILDREN, AND ATTEMPTED SUICIDE OF THE MUItDEltGit.

Sergeant Whitworth, master gunner of Sandown] Fort, in the Isle of Wight, has Blain his wild and six children, and slumped to destroy him self. The scene in his quarters was.) most BIMCI -; leg. The woman audience of the children had been murdered in their sleep, their throats had been mortally cut with a razor or cutlass ; but one of the little children had evidently run about the room during the perpetration of the murders, for the soles of its feet were stained with blood. Whitworth having failed to kill himself, reported the murders at the officers' quarters, where he talked in a most incoherent manner, and seemed to be labouring under some inexplicable delusion. A coroner's jury inquired into the facts, and delivered the following singular verdict :-" We are agreed to a verdict that William Henry Whitworth is guilty of the wilful murder of his wife and six children and

the jury at the some time wish to add, if they may be allowed to do so. for the sake of of their neighbours and the locality, that they are of opinion that the man was insane at that time. Whitworth was to be tried at the Winchester)