COST OF THE WAR IN SOUTH AFRICA.

Kumara Times, Issue 1133, 17 May 1880, Page 4

COST OF THE WAR IN SOUTH AFRICA.

On March 10 a supplementary estimate was printed containing an estimate of “the farther amount which will be required, beyond the ordintry grants of Parliament for army services, to defray the charges which will come in course of payment daring the year ending March 31, 1880, in connection with the expedition against the chief Secocoeni, in the Transvaal. ” The amount is L 200,000, There were also printed the details of a supplementary vote of credit of L 1,225,200, being an “estimate of the farther amount required, beyond the ordinary grants of Parliament, to defray the expenditure which will come in course of payment daring the year ending March 31, 1880, in consequence of the war in South Africa,” The services to which this sum, together with previous grants voted in the session of 1879 tor the war in South Africa, will be applicable are thus explained—Army, L 3,353,000 ; navy, L 520,000 ; contingencies, L 60.000; grant in aid of expenditure incurred in the suppression of a native rebellion in Griquaiand West, including the cost of raising the moneys required, L 222.200; expedition against Secocoeni and occupation of the Transvaal, L 300,000; tots! outlay, L 4,446,200. From this total moat be deducted the sum already granted in vote of credit, L 3,000,000; available on army grants, L 200,000; available on navy/rants, L 20,000 ; making altogether, L 3,220,000, and leaving the supple* men ary vote, as already stated, at L 1,226,200. With reference to the grant of L 222.200 in respect to the rebellion in Griquaiand, there is the following note : “This sum was advanced out of the Treasury chest in the years 1878 and 1879, on the order of Lord Chelmsford and the Treasury repaid it to the chest out of the vote of credit taken for the war in South Africa in 1878 79. The Controller and Auditor General has, however, objected to the charge because it is insufficiently vouched. The Treasury had hoped that such documetary proof of the Griquaiand expenditure as would satisfy the Controller and Auditor-General would have been received before this time. That, however, is not the case; and the Treasury agree that the sum should not be charged against the vote of credit of 1878-79. The Colony, however, cannot repay the advance, and the Treasury must therefore provide for it by asking Parliament to make a corresponding grant in aid of the expenditure of the Colony, leaving the question of repayment for subsequent settlement. Her Majesty’s Government are in correspondence with the South African authorities upon the subject.” The parliamentary paper containing this information is dated Treasury Chambers, March 9, 1880, and is signed by Sir H.Selwyn Ibbetsoa. The question of this supplementary vote was discussed in the House of Commons on the day it wns presented. Mr Rylands asked if there was any expectation on the part of the Government that the South African Government would repay any considerable portion of this this sum, and also if it was in excess of the ordinary charge for the troops employed in South Africa. Sir H. Selwyn-Ibbetson said the vote was rendered necessary by reason of an excessive expenditure having occurred which it was thought that not probably be charged to the Vote of Credit of 1878 79. He thought there was a fair prospect of a considerable portion being recovered from the Colonies. His right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have to make a statement on the subject on March 11, and he could not, without forestalling that statement, enter into further explanations of the way in which these charges were to be apportioned. Objection was then taken to the form of the vote by Mr Courtney, Sir G, Balfour, Lord F. Cavendish and others, and it was urged that it should have been presented under four heads. Ultimately Sir H. SelwynIbbetson consented to withdraw the vote, and do his best to represent it in a way which would meet the objections of hon. members.