§ LORD HOTHAMsaid, that the question in reference to which he must trespass upon the indulgence of the House was one which he had intended to raise when the House was in Committee on "Civil Contingencies;" but the hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury having raised that discussion without the customary notice, he had been deprived of his opportunity for doing so. He desired 289 then to call the attention of the First Lord of the Treasury to the existing practice of exacting from officers appointed to be members of the Military Division of the most honourable Order of the Bath an engagement that the Insignia of the Order, which they have received from the Sovereign in person, or which have been transmitted to them by Her Majesty's commands, shall after their death be returned. Now, if the noble Lord should reply, as he probably would, that the practice here complained of was one which prevailed equally with respect to the other great Orders of the country, he (Lord Hotham) was prepared humbly to submit that inasmuch as officers received military clasps of the Bath for personal services against the enemies of then country, while with respect to the other orders, in nineteen cases out of twenty appointments to them were made merely in favour of adherents of the Government of the day, no fair comparison could be instituted between the two cases. On the other hand, if the noble Lord should say that the present practice in this matter did not differ from what had heretofore been the rule, he must remind the House that since the conclusion of the war with France the Order of the Bath had been completely remodelled. Formerly it consisted only of one class, numbering from twenty-five to thirty-five officers; but at the conclusion of the war it was divided into three classes. The Grand Crosses, who were known also as the Knights of the Bath still numbered from twenty-five to thirty-five, whereas the Commanders and Companions reckoned upwards of six hundred, irrespective of a large number of foreign officers who were admitted as honorary members. Now, considering the extent to which we had adopted the practice of foreign countries with regard to the decorations, and considering that in the case of the Crimean medal the decoration was given, not only to the living, but to the families of those who did not live to receive it, he thought it was but right that such of Her Majesty's officers as were entitled by their conduct to so distinguished a mark of Royal favour as was involved in the reception of the Order of the Bath should be allowed to retain the decoration, and transmit it to their posterity, as a proof of the Sovereign's appreciation of the services they had performed. With respect to the decorations themselves, there was one which was conferred upon the "Grand Crosses" only, and went 290 by the title of "the collar," it being an article of great value, costing between £200 and £300. That was a decoration only worn upon great occasions, and according to the orders of the Sovereign, and perhaps it might appear to a slight degree unreasonable if it were asked to leave such a decoration in the possession of the wearer's family after his death. But inasmuch as other portions of the decoration might be said to constitute a part of the officer's uniform, and might be worn at all times, he was unable to see why his family should not retain them. Investitures of the "Order of the Bath" took place from time to time, and on such occasions the recipients were ordered to the palace, and receive from their Sovereign's own hands the decoration of the class to which they had been nominated. The moment, however, they left Her Majesty's presence, and got into the adjoining room, an official presented them for signature with a printed document in which they engaged to restore the decoration at their death. Such was the manner of procedure on those occasions. But there was another consideration to be noticed, and that was that the materials of which the decoration was composed ought to be such as that an officer might with propriety wear it. The House, however, would be rather astonished when it came to know the actual fact. When an officer received the order of knighthood from Her Majesty, he was presented with two decorations, namely, a "star" and a "jewel." Now, although the "jewel" was of handsome materials, and was much larger and more expensive than necessary, the "star," which was the principal portion of the decoration, was composed of most miserable materials. Pasteboard, tinsel and spangles constituted the "star" which Her Majesty placed in the hands of those whom it was intended to honour; so that the moment the officer left the palace he was obliged to hurry to his private jeweller, and at a cost of some £14 or so, provide himself with a star suitable to him. Now, he would ask the House, was that an arrangement befitting a great nation? Indeed, there had been within the last two years a practical recognition of the impropriety of such an arrangement. On the conclusion of the war with Russia, a large interchange of Orders had taken place between Her Majesty and her Allies, the Emperor of the French having conferred orders upon 291 our officers with great profusion, while Her Majesty distributed them both among the French and Sardinian officers. And in order to give the greater eclat to the distribution, an investiture of the Order of the Bath was held in front of Sebastopol, and Lord Gough was sent out to represent the Sovereign. Now, it was reported that when it became known such an investiture was contemplated, a representation was made to Her Majesty's Government that it was impossible, with any degree of propriety, to present to these foreign officers "stars" of the miserable description doled out to our own officers. Well, what he was about to say he mentioned merely as rumour; and as he spoke in the presence of an honourable and gallant Friend of his (General Sir W. Codrington), he was open to contradiction. However, he had been informed that such a representation had been made to the Government, and that in consequence silver "stars" were sent out, to be appropriated to the French and Sardinian officers, whereas the English officers that were invested upon the same occasion had to submit to the humiliation of receiving, in sight of all the French and Sardinian officers, nothing better than the old miserable tinsel "star," which they could only put in their pockets, and defer wearing their decoration until they had been able to communicate with England and purchase suitable "stars." Now there was no one, however desirous of economy, that would not allow it was but right and proper that if English officers were to wear decorations they should be of a decent and comely description; at all events, that they ought not to be placed in a worse position by their own Government than were officers of foreign states. And let him not here awaken the sensibilities of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with fancies of having financial demands upon him, for all that was required to be done might be arranged at a very trifling cost. The decoration at present given, which was known as "the jewel," was unnecessarily heavy, most inconvenient for officers to wear on horseback, and was very costly to supply in the event of its being lost or stolen, which not unfrequently happened. Now, in reducing that decoration within reasonable proportions they would consult the convenience and appearance of the wearers; and in the case of the investiture of a Knight Commander of the Bath it would enable them to give the two full decorations to two individuals at a 292 smaller cost than they could now give the two decorations to one individual. Hon. Gentlemen were aware that the value of a decoration did not depend upon its intrinsic worth; and in proof of that let him refer to the two great military Orders of Europe, "the Order of Maria Theresa," in Austria, and of "St. George," in Russia. As for the Order of "Maria Theresa," whose festival was celebrated upon the 18th of June with such pomp at Vienna—its rules were so rigid that no one could be admitted into the Order who was not, according to the strictest interpretation of its rules, entitled to the rank; while according to "the Order of St. George" of Russia its rules were so precise that no one could receive the decoration of the first class who had not commanded in a general action. Nay, the first class was not otherwise wearable by the Emperor himself. Still, in both those cases the decorations were simple and small, though, at the same time, they were neat and convenient, and such as, if by any chance they were lost, could be replaced at a trifling expense. Now, he was quite aware that the distribution of military honours rested with the Crown, but he hoped the noble Lord at the head of the Government would acknowledge that not a single word had escaped from him that evening which in the smallest degree reflected upon the Royal prerogative, while he trusted that his observations were sufficient to induce him to take this matter into his consideration, and to determine how to render such advice to his Royal Mistress as would tend to bring about an arrangement at once more satisfactory and more just to all parties.
§ SIR WILLIAM CODRINGTONsaid, he would willingly acknowledge that the arrangements of the present day, connected with the distribution of military honours, were superior to what they formerly were. In former times, on obtaining the Grand Cross of the Bath the fee was £254; and for the Commandership of the Bath £100. Now, however, those fees were very properly done away with, and he hoped that the noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) would take into consideration the abolition of the remnant of the spirit of wretched parsimony visible in the supply of this miserable bit of tinsel as a "star," which an officer could not wear, and which it was unworthy of the country to present to him. The decoration which he received was not made of permanent materials, and the consequence was, an officer had to get 293 a silver "star" to represent the honour conferred upon him. The change suggested by the noble Lord (Lord Hotham) would lead to a very trifling expense if the stars were made smaller, so as to cost between £7 and £8—and as not more than ten would be granted in the year it was impossible that the House of Commons could grudge the expense. The noble Lord was also perfectly correct in pointing out the difference which was observable in the treatment of the French and English officers upon the occasion to which he referred. The ceremony, however, was intended solely for the French, as there were no Sardinians present, the Sardinian army having gone away. Well, Marshal Pelissier was there, at the head of a great number of Generals of division and Generals of brigade; in all about twenty French officers were to receive the decoration, and the remains of the army, some 16,000 or 18,000 men, were drawn up to witness the spectacle. Well, Lord Gough handed the silver "stars," which had been very properly sent out from England to the French officers, and they were placed upon their breasts, when they stood by waiting for the presentation to the English officers. Well, there were very few English officers present to receive the decoration of K.C.B., not more than two or three, and they, instead of receiving the silver "star," had the tinsel "star," slipped into their hands in the presence of the French officers, a proceeding which the House would allow was not very dignified. He must own he very much regretted the circumstance at the time, but at the moment it was impossible to avoid such an effect.
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONI cannot quite agree with the noble Lord who spoke on the other side, that there is anything unseemly or improper in requiring that the badges and orders which are given to an individual who has distinguished himself shall be returned at his death. They stand on a different footing from the Order of Valour, or a medal, or those other things which are given to those who have distinguished themselves. At the same time those portions of the badge, such as the ribbon and the "star," which have been purchased by the individual himself, of course are not returned. However, with regard to the other point, which is more deserving of attention, I must say that there is a great deal in what has been said by the noble Lord and my hon. and gallant Friend behind me. It might perhaps be 294 expedient to reconsider the practice which has hitherto prevailed—namely, that of giving, when the Order is conferred, a mere worsted ornament, which is certainly only a semblance and token of the Order, and which is not a material that could be worn or be expected to be worn. The expense is not very much, and I have no doubt that when the Sovereign is advised to confer upon officers who have distinguished themselves in the public service marks of hon our, those marks of honour should not be attended with a forced expense, but be given freely. Upon that principle of late years the fees have been, not abolished, as my hon. and gallant Friend supposes, but repaid by the public in the case of Orders conferred upon a military or naval officer for services performed for the country. I really do not see why the country should not pay for the "star" to be worn by that officer. At all events the subject shall be taken into consideration.