Perhaps it was a favourite saying of his?
Anna and Kester’s quotes are from ‘Notes of conversations with the Duke of Wellington, 1831-1851’ by Philip Henry, 5th Earl Stanhope. There are two similar quotes from conversations within a week of each other (4th & 11th Nov 1831). The wider context is amusing and illuminating:
Quote:
4th Nov 1831
They talked of officers promoted from the ranks. I asked the Duke whether they were not invariably harsh to those in the same order from which they had sprung? He answered in the negative, but said that their fault always was, not being able to resist drink—their low origin then came out—and you therefore could never perfectly trust them.
Your Grace thinks our troops rather given to that?
"Yes, they cannot resist drink."
I asked the Duke as to the difference between our soldiers and the French as to being impressed by harangues and proclamations? He said there was very little difference. "The proclamations you read of in the French army were much more seen in the papers than by the soldiers—they were meant for Paris. Besides, we too have our orders of the day. As to speeches—what effect on the whole army can be made by a speech, since you cannot conveniently make it heard by more than a thousand men standing about you?”
But, Sir, was it not usual for Napoleon to make impressive harangues whenever he gave an eagle?
“Why I should say—except that the thing might be better done—it was much the same as our giving away colours; one always says something then—almost always. I don't mean to say that there is no difference in the composition or therefore the feeling of the French army and ours. The French system of conscription brings together a fair sample of all classes; ours is composed of the scum of the earth—the mere scum of the earth. It is only wonderful that we should be able to make so much out of them afterwards. The English soldiers are fellows who have all enlisted for drink—that is the plain fact—they have all enlisted for drink."
Quote:
11th Nov 1831
The Duke spoke strongly in favour of having a strong military punishment in reserve, were it only to give efficacy to the milder ones. I think he must have alluded to flogging. He gave us an account of the system of billing* up in the Guards. "Who would," he said, "bear to be billed up, but for the fear of a stronger punishment? He would knock down the sentry and walk out !"
Do they beat them in the French army?
"Oh, they bang them about very much with ramrods and that sort of thing, and then they shoot them. Besides, a French army is composed very differently from ours. The conscription calls out a share of every class—no matter whether your son or my son—all must march ; but our friends—I may say it in this room—are the very scum of the earth. People talk of their enlisting from their fine military feeling—all stuff—no such thing. Some of our men enlist from having got bastard children—some for minor offences—many more for drink; but you can hardly conceive such a set brought together, and it really is wonderful that we should have made them the fine fellows they are. I have never known officers raised from the ranks turn out well, nor the system answer; they cannot stand drink."
* That is, being confined to barracks, with extra drills.
Context is all!
The book is available on archive.org and looks well worth a read.