CAPTAIN AYLMERasked the Secretary of State for War, If his attention has been called to the General Order No. 70, of 1881, wherein it was ordered that the 7th Regiment should bear the title of "The Royal Fusiliers (City of London) Regiment," and the 8th Regiment the title of "The King's (Liverpool) Regiment," and to General Order No. 86 just issued, wherein it is ordered that in all correspondence these Regiments are to be described by the abbreviated titles "The Royal Fusiliers" and "The Liverpool Regiment," respectively; and, whether he can give any reason why the special favour granted to the 7th Regiment to use its historic title should be refused to the equally distinguished 8th Regiment?
§ MR. CHILDERSI am really sorry that the hon. and gallant Member should think it 'necessary to trouble the House with so trivial a Question. The full titles of the two Regiments are the "Royal Fusiliers (City of London) Regiment," and the "King's (Liverpool) Regiment," and these fully and satisfactorily describe the characteristics of the two Regiments. But it would be mere red-tape to be obliged, in correspondence, to use the full titles which have been abbreviated for that purpose only to the "Royal Fusiliers," and the "Liverpool." Perhaps I may say that to call the latter the "King's" might lead to some confusion; and I trust that the House will not wish to interfere in such matters of mere official detail.
CAPTAIN AYLMERsaid, the subject of his Question was considered by no means trivial by many persons who had addressed letters to him with reference to it.