§ MR. HANBURY (Preston)I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to five more letters in the Globe of 27th February, complaining of the laxity of discipline and the facility with which men are qualified as efficient, and retained as efficient, in order to qualify for the capitation grant of 30s., in the London Royal Naval Artillery Volunteers; what number of men received the capitation grant in the largest battery, No. 4. in 1888; whether it is the fact that no certificates were signed by the officer commanding that battery; and whether the capitation grant has been paid in other batteries without the certificates being duly signed?
§ * THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Lord G. HAMILTON,) Middlesex, EalingThe letters published in the newspaper referred to in the question have been brought to my notice. Exclusive of officers, 49 men in No. 4 Battery earned the capitation grant in 1888. There are two distinct certificates, only one of which is sent to and required by the Admiralty, namely, that on which payment of the capitation grant is made. This carries the signatures of the naval officer appointed by the Admiralty for the instruction of the corps and for examining each individual as to his efficiency, and of the commanding officer of the corps. This certificate was given for each person for whom the grant was paid in 1888 belonging to No. 4 Battery, and also for all other batteries. The second certificate is a personal certificate which was established and used in the corps long before any capitation allowance was granted to the Royal Naval Artillery Volunteers. It has been since modified to coincide with the new regulations. It is conferred by the same officers. It does not 122 come to the Admiralty, and every qualified Volunteer can claim one. The method and time for their distribution are not laid down, and the practice varies in different corps. No complaint has been received at the Admiralty on the subject till now, nor does it appear that any Volunteer who, being entitled to a certificate, has asked for one has been refused. The capitation grant was paid in the case of the other batteries of the Loudon corps under similar circumstances.
§ MR. HANBURYThe noble Lord stated the other day that the certificate was signed by the officer commanding-the battery. Am I to understand that that was not the case?
§ * LORD G. HAMILTONIt is a somewhat complicated case. The certificate was signed by the instructor and countersigned by the commanding officer.