COLONEL NORTHsaid, he rose to make a few remarks upon the answer which had been given by the Under Secretary for War to the question of the hon. and gallant Member for Huntingdon (General Peel). The hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary had said that the question of the lieutenant colonels had been brought under the consideration of the Government. That was quite true, for he (Colonel North) had called the attention of the Government to the subject a year and a half ago without leading to any result. Subsequently the question was revived by Colonel Lindsay, but the Government did not manifest any great interest in the matter, for they allowed the House to be counted out. The subject, however, was one of very great importance to a number of officers who had rendered valuable services to their country. Until the warrant of the 6th of October, 1854, no field officer could be passed over by another unless the latter had been made an aide de-camp to the Queen; but the warrant entirely changed that state of things, and officers who had commanded their regiments for three years were allowed, irrespective of their periods of general service, to attain at once the rank of full colonels. What the lieutenant colonels who were affected by that arrangement complained of was, that the warrant of 1854 was, as regarded them, retrospective, and the consequence was, that those officers who had served with credit in all parts of the world, and many of whom had been promoted for gallantry in the field, found themselves passed over by boys, both in service and in age. No less than 140 officers had been so passed over. The thing could have been easily remedied at the time by bringing forward those officers in a brevet, 1313 making a larger number of full colonels, and a smaller number of lieutenant colonels. He had proposed that course as one of common justice, and with a view to prevent the galling feeling which those officers had experienced in seeing their juniors passing over their heads. His complaint against the Government was that they had not taken into consideration the recommendations of the Royal Commission which sat on the warrant, to adopt some measure to obviate the injustice which the adoption of that warrant would cause. The members of that Commission had recommended a liberal view of the claims of the existing lieutenant colonels, and the Government had stated that they were taking the matter into consideration, but the way in which their consideration seemed likely to act, he would instance by mentioning the case of the present senior officer of those whose case was now under consideration, Lieutenant Colonel Dann. Up to the 30th of June last sixty-four junior officers had passed over his head, while at present the number amounted to eighty-six. Was it not heart-rending to gallant men like them to see themselves passed over by officers who, compared to themselves, were mere boys, both in service and in the number of years they had been field officers? Many of the officers thus passed over had received their promotion for gallantry in the field and suffering from wounds, and having full reliance on the warrant then in force, by which no officer but a Queen's aide-de-camp could pass over their heads, they had retired from their regiments. Owing to the unfair course of the new warrant being made retrospective, their expectations had been deceived. In the natural course of things, those officers could only receive their promotion by surviving the whole of 164 generals on the Army List; but how many of them were likely to survive that number of generals? An officer now entering the army knew what he had to expect, but he did think it would be only justice to those who had been so injuriously affected by the warrant of 1854, to give them their promotion by brevet. He trusted, therefore, that the matter would be laid before the proper authorities with a view of so grievous an injustice being obviated. He should be glad to know how it was that while the officers and men of the French army were wearing the Turkish medal in 1855, not a single English soldier had yet received it, although at this moment nearly all the 1314 regiments which were entitled to it were on their way to India? He did not know whether it was the fault of the Foreign Office or of the War Office; but he did know that it was perfectly disgraceful that the officers and men of our army should be treated in that manner. There was another point to which he would advert before sitting down, that was the injustice of promoting officers commanding regiments to be general officers over the heads of men holding staff appointments, of so much responsibility as those, for instance, of Deputy Adjutant General and Deputy Quartermaster General in Ireland. It was not fair that men holding such responsible offices as those should labour for years without any recognition of their services. He trusted, therefore, that that matter also would receive proper attention from Her Majesty's Government.
§ LORD HOTHAMobserved, that he had heard with satisfaction the intention expressed on the part of the Government by the hon. Baronet opposite to take into consideration the subject introduced by his hon. and gallant Friend, but he regretted that the hon. Baronet had not been authorized to make a more decided statement and go a little further than he had done. He (Lord Hotham) concurred entirely in what had fallen from the hon. and gallant Member for Huntingdon, the hon. and gallant Member for Greenwich (General Codrington), and the hon. and gallant Officer who last addressed the House, and he would only observe that, whether they were dealing with the claims of civil or military officers, they ought to adhere to one rule and strictly to maintain good faith. It was quite clear that good faith had not been kept with the officers whoso case had been referred to, and he hoped the Government would not only see the necessity of taking some steps to remedy the grievance of which they complained, but of doing so without loss of time, as delay would only increase the difficulty of dealing with the subject.
§ MR. STAFFORDsaid, the Under Secretary for War (Sir J. Ramsden) had answered the question put to him to-night with great ingenuousness, but the hon. Baronet's reply conveyed an entirely different impression from the answer he gave a few nights ago to the hon. Member for Evesham (Sir H. Willoughby.) He (Mr. Stafford) found, however, that the previous answer of the hon. Baronet was completely contradicted by a statement which appeared 1315 in The Times of that morning, and which had been openly and frankly quoted by the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck), and as frankly admitted by the hon. Baronet. The statement to which he (Mr. Stafford) referred was in these terms:—
It is no exaggeration to say that the officers of the corps which have lately started have been oppressed with dread as to the effects of the climate on their men while muffled in their present equipment. If any regiments should have been provided for, surely it was those which sailed yesterday—the 97th, 20th, and part of the 42nd; Highlanders. Yet we know that these men had not a single cap cover, and that they will land in India in the same uniforms in which they quitted Aldershot and Shorncliffe, without as much as a cloth to cover the hideous black shako, which is truly nicknamed in those regiments the 'Sepoy's Friend.'" [The Times, Aug. 10.]Now, from the answer given by the Under Secretary for War a few nights ago he (Mr. Stafford) concluded—and he thought all who heard that answer must have concluded—that protective clothing against the burning sun of India would accompany the soldiers in the vessels in which they sailed from this country. That turned out not to be the case, and the hon. Baronet now informed the House that orders had been sent overland that the requisite clothing should be provided for the troops on their arrival in India. He (Mr. Stafford) hoped that would be the case; but he complained, not of the hon. Baronet, who he was sure had no intention to deceive the House, but of those whose duty it was to afford him information, and who—the hon. Baronet being too new in office to doubt their veracity—had misinformed him. Had it not been for the statement in the newspaper from which he had quoted, for the comments upon that statement, and for the recognition of its accuracy which, he must say, had been wrung from the War Office, the troops would have embarked for India under a misconception as to the provision which had been made for their clothing. He (Mr. Stafford) feared from this statement an ill-omened and unhappy repetition of the course of events with which unfortunately they were all too familiar. Similar statements had been made by the same journal; they were denied by the authorities, they proved true at a subsequent period, they proved true beyond the power of question, cavil, or denial, but they proved true too late. He (Mr. Stafford) sincerely hoped the present occurrence was not the precurser of the renewal of a state of things 1316 which, with all respect for the hon. Baronet, he must designate as mendacious and disastrous. He would impress upon the hon. Baronet the necessity of informing himself of the real state of affairs with regard to the troops, and would remind him that, with the experience of the past, still more disgrace and dishonour would attach to the Government if, after all that had happened, they either deluded, or lent themselves to delude, that House and the country with reference to the condition of our soldiers. After the horrible and heartrending calamities which had resulted from neglect at home, the responsibility and guilt would be far greater than they were at the outbreak of the Crimean war. He had merely risen to give this warning to the hon. Baronet, who was as yet too young in office to be responsible for anything more than the statements he made in that House, but who, as the organ of the War Office, occupied a most responsible position, and who ought to make those acquainted with the various departments of the service answerable to him for the truth of the statements which, on their authority, he brought before the House.
§ Main Question put, and agreed to.