Spencer, Rt. Hn.C.R(Northants | Toulmin, George Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E. Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel Balfour, Rt. Hon. B. W. (Leeds Trevelyan, Charles Philips NOES. Hamilton, Marq of(L'nd'nderry Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H Blundell, Colonel Henry Dickson, Charles Scott Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage Original Question again proposed. MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE said that this item of £700,000 included the purchase of remounts. He noticed in the papers a paragraph from Reuter's correspondent stating that in Somaliland camels , 1903-4 , John (Durham, Mid.) TELLERS FOR THE AYES-Cap- Percy, Earl Pilkington, Colonel Richard Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne Reid, James (Greenock) Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley Valentia, Viscount Hood had been purchased at elastic prices. He thought they were entitled to have some explanation as to how this vast sum of £700,000 had been spent upon transport and remounts. Everybody knew that in this expedition the question of transport had been from first to last the crux of the the views of the majority of the House of Commons and he felt certain that he represented the views of the great majority of people outside the House. This expedition was regarded as a purposeless campaign which offered no hope of termination within a reasonable period, and it was being waged with very little hope of a satisfactory result. *THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member has no right to go into the policy of the campaign except so far as it refers to transport and remounts. situation. It had been exceedingly sum under this MR. MUNRO FERGUSON said he merely referred to the size of this item for remounts as an example of the need that there was for some far more specific statement of policy than they had yet received from the War Office, to justify what was a very unsatisfactory cam MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORT said it was quite true that the Supplementary Estimates were three times the size of the original Estimates, but it should not be forgotten that the original Estimate was based on the assumption that the campaign would have come to MR. MUNRO FERGUSON (Leith Burghs) said the head was a very large one, although nobody could be surprised that the cost of transport in this campaign was very large. This was not merely a question of what they had spent upon transport, but as to what they were going to spend, and the expenditure of the future was certain to be very large. The item as it was now presented to them, was about three times the estimated cost of the whole campaign, and it would continue to be one of their largest items of expenditure. The Secretary of State for War had said he had some expectation of a favourable result, but he could not prophesy as to what the course of events would be, and £700,000 required for transport and rethey were, therefore, mounts was distributed. In respect of pursuing what might be an interminable expenditure, £400,000 it represented the transport of and this would have a very bad effect troops, animals, and stores from India to upon public opinion. He was satisfied the seat of war, and the balance of that the right hon. Gentleman the Mem- £300,000 represented, for the most part, ber for Croydon had represented that the purchase of transport animals, both night the common sense of the country locally and by the Indian Government. upon the Somaliland campaign. He also He believed the number of animals— believed that the right hon. Gentleman in the views he had expressed represented now camels, horses, and mules-was about 19,000. They had cost, therefore, an average of about £16 each. He did not know that unnecessarily high prices had not himself responsible for the conduct been paid. MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE said he did not think the hon. Member could expect them to be quite satisfied with that explanation. MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: We are not satisfied at all. MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE said he agreed with the hon. Member that if they were going on with this campaign it would be most foolish extravagance not to provide the Army with proper equipment. What the hon. Member did not tell them was upon what system this large amount of transport had been bought. From their experience in the last war in South Africa, they knew that it made all the difference in the world as to how they bought the animals. They had most startling disclosures during the Boer war as to the purchase of remounts, and what guarantee had they that something of the same sort had not been perpetrated in this case. He understood that in India a complete system of information had been organised, and that the Government bought through large contractors, rejecting animals which were not up to the proper standard. Had that method been adopted, or had we gone on under the old system of buying leisurely through dealers, which obtained under the British Remount Department in connection with the War Office? Those were points upon which the Financial Secretary to the Treasury had said nothing, and, while he was very unwilling to move a reduction, to put himself on the safe side, he would move that the Vote be reduced by £100 in order to get an effective answer from the Financial Secretary to the Treasury. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Item, Vote 6, Sub-head F (Somaliland Expeditionary Force, Transport and Remounts), be reduced by £100." -(Mr. Charles Hobhouse.) MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORT said if the hon. Gentleman was satisfied with the Indian system he might withdraw his Motion. The campaign was being managed and conducted under the Indian Government out of funds provided by the War Department. He was of the campaign. The animals were being purchased by the Indian Government, and presumably under the system which the hon. Member approved. MR. FLYNN complained that the estimate was originally only £100,000. Who outside Bedlam would have expected to see the Estimate swollen from £100,000 to £800,000. He rememof the detailed bered reading some accounts of the expedition against the Mad Mullah-he was rather inclined to think the word "Mad" should be transferred from the the Mullah to the War Office. He could not forget having read that we were so unprepared for the expedition on which we had entered that the wily dervishes took the opportunity to sell us their camels at enhanced prices. Clearly the Indian Government had failed to take the proper precautions to secure a supply of transport animals. There was too much elasticity in this Estimate indeed, to describe as elastic an increase of eight times the original Estimate was to abuse the word; it was something more than elastic. MR. WILLIAM REDMOND complained that although they had been told that the campaign was being conducted by the Indian Government, yet they had not had a single, solitary word from the Secretary for India to show that he took the slightest interest in the matter. He could not admit that the House of Commons had accepted the responsibility for this war. At every stage in connection with the proceedings most vigorous and emphatic protests had been entered against the operations by Members of the House. Even the majority could not be said to have authorised the expenditure. hon. Gentleman is now travelling a long *THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! The way from the Vote before the Committee MR. WILLIAM REDMOND said he recognised that the right hon. Gentleman was anxious to conduct the proceedings in the fairest possible way, but he submitted that he was only making a legitimate reply to a statement from the Government Benches as to the responsi- for the good order and good temper of the bility of the House of Commons. *THE CHAIRMAN: That was the reason why I did not interrupt the hon. Member before. I now invite him to give his attention to the item before the Committee. MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I am very much obliged for your kindly invitation. I am most anxious to pay the closest attention in my power to the Vote. The hon. Member then went on to state that his objection to the item was that the House sanctioned the expedition on the understanding that £100,000 would be sufficient for transport, yet now the heads of the War Office came down and said, "We have made a little mistake; we ought to have asked for £800,000 for transports in this wretched, miserable war in Somaliland." Would hon. Members have so cheerfully voted money for the war had they known that the expenditure on that would have been so enormously increased? This one item was an illustration of the whole policy of the Government in the matter. Nobody knew where we were being led to. Was it unreasonable for hon. Members representing Ireland to ask for a plain and clear indication as to what was in the minds of the authorities with regard to this protracted campaign? Were they to anticipate any further increases of expenditure? *THE CHAIRMAN: I am afraid the hon. Member has forgotten my invitation. I must renew my invitation to him to confine himself strictly to the item now before the Committee. MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I certainly had not forgotten you, Sir, and I hope I never shall. MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER rose in his place That the Question and claimed to move, be now put. *THE CHAIRMAN: I think the hon. Member is about to bring his observations to a close, therefore for the present I will not accept the Motion. MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: You are perfectly correct, Sir. It is a good thing debate that you are in the chair instead of a gentleman so impatient that he will not allow anybody to criticise, even for five minutes, the Department for which he is reponsible. Member asked if the ratepayers were ever In conclusion, the hon. to get rid of the nightmare of that miserable, inglorious, and futile expedition? Was it in accordance with ancient usage that such Supplementary Estimates should be put down without any explanation at all? He claimed that they ought to protest by dividing against that system of enormously increased Supplementary Estimates and also against a war, commenced by the Foreign Office, muddled by the War Office but managed by the India Office, the representative of which had not deigned to say a word in regard to it. MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER replied that the purchases were made in this case in Aden and India, and there was consequently no necessity to attach a financial adviser to the staff of the commander of the expedition. In reply to the hon. Member for Islington, of course only expenditure to the 31st March was covered by the Estimate. MR. FLYNN said his information was that the bulk of the camels were purchased at the seat of war. MR. FLAVIN (Kerry, N.) complained Question put. of the unsatisfactory character of the The Committee divided: Ayes, 120; Government explanations. Noes, 169; (Division List No. 26) AYES. Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.) | Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D., Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herb. Henry Boland, John Brigg, John Broadhurst, Henry Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn Burke, E. Haviland Buxton, Sydney Charles Campbell, John (Armagh, S.) Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen) Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith) Gilhooly, James Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H. MacNeill, John Gordon Swift Nannetti, Joseph P. Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) O'Kelly, Jas. (Roscommon, N.) Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herb. John Partington, Oswald Goddard, Daniel Ford Griffith, Ellis J. Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B. Harmsworth, R. (Leicester) Hayden, John Patrick Agg-Gardner, James Tynte Blundell, Colonel Henry Perks, Robert William Reckitt, Harold James NOES. Bond, Edward Reddy, M. Redmond, John E. (Waterford) Rose, Charles Day Sheehy, David Shipman, Dr. John G. Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R(Northants Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.) Yoxall, James Henry TELLERS FOR THE AYES-Mr. Charles Hobhouse and Sir Joseph Leese. Davenport, W. Bromley- |