THE LAND TRANSPORT CORPS.

HC Deb 23 April 1858 vol 149 cc1621-7

LORD ADOLPHUS VANE-TEMPEST, in calling attention to the allegations contained in a petition presented to the House from the officers of the Land Transport Corps, on the 11th of August last, observed, that in 1855, owing to the defective state of the transport service, the corps referred to was formed, and that at the close of the war with Russia it was decided to dispense with it, and organize a military train in its stead. Last year, upon the Motion of the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duncombe) a Committee of this House was appointed to inquire into the claims of the men of the Land Transport Corps, and the report of that committee afforded a striking illustration of the great inconvenience attendant upon the want of unity which existed between the two departments of the Secretary of State for War and the Commander in Chief. It was under this anomalous state of things that the Land Transport Corps were enlisted; and as they were supposed to have been organized by the civil department, they were in the unfortunate position of not being acknowledged by the military department. The consequence was, that on the disbandment of the corps in 1856, the men were not discharged in the manner in which they ought to have been as soldiers in the army. Great complaints of injustice followed, and the Committee who sat and inquired into those complaints reported that the Land Transport Corps were from the time of their creation part and parcel of Her Majesty's land forces. The officers of that corps now came forward in their turn and made the same complaints as the men—that they were induced to enter the corps under the impression that it would be considered a portion of the regular army, and that they would be treated as other officers in the British army, and be entitled to equal privileges with them. In June, 1856, Mr. Frederick Peel, at the time Under Secretary for War, in answer to a question which was put to him in this House, stated in the. most positive terms that the officers of the Land Transport Corps were to be considered and treated as officers of the army. Upon this assurance, a large number of deserving non-commissioned officers accepted commissions in the corps, and upon its reduction they applied to be transferred to the Military Train which was then being organized in lieu of the corps, or for the usual half-pay of the rank they held at reduction of the corps, to which, as officers, they conceived themselves to be entitled. They now complained that the rate of half-pay awarded to them was not in accordance with the Queen's regulations, and had not been sanctioned by the military authorities. It appeared, in fact, that a special rate of half-pay had been settled by the Lords of the Treasury to meet the eases of these officers. The officers of the Land Transport Corps were entitled to the same half-pay as officers in the cavalry; but whilst a captain in the half-pay of cavalry received 7s. 6d. a day, a captain in half-pay of the Land Transport Corps got but 5s. a day; whilst a lieutenant in the former received 4s. 8d. a day, a lieutenant in the latter got but 3s. 6d. a day; and whilst a cornet in the former received 3s. 6d. a day, a cornet in the latter received 3s. a day. The difference, so far as the country was concerned, was but trifling, but it was of great importance to these men, who had fought so gallantly for their country, for what, was the result? Why, that brave men, who had risen from the ranks, and accepted these commissions in the Land Transport Corps, now found that they had not the means to maintain themselves in their new position. Among the clients whom he represented on that occasion, no less than seven had obtained medals for distinguished conduct; two had received the cross of the Legion of Honour for gallantry in the field. All of these had served in the Crimea, and several of them in India, and eleven had been wounded in the service. Indeed, if hon. Members would take the trouble to examine the list, he felt sure they would arrive at the conclusion that the whole of the claimants were deserving the consideration and sympathy of the House. Another point to which he might allude as distinctly proving that these officers were entitled to be regarded as officers of the army was this—in 1854, Her Majesty was pleased to bestow a mark of her approbation of the good conduct and bravery of her army in the Crimea, and instructed the War Minister that a certain number of commissions should be given to such regiments of the Guards, the line, and the cavalry, as were then serving in the Crimea. It being represented by General Dacres that the artillery was not included in this gracious proof of Her Majesty's approbation, the Minister for War wrote from England that the artillery were to be included. General Dacres thereupon stated that owing to the special nature of the service of the artillery, the non-commissioned officers of artillery would be most useful in the Land Transport Corps; and Viscount Hardinge, who was then at the Horse Guards, sanctioned the view taken by General Dacres, and ordered that noncommissioned officers in the artillery should have commissions in the Land Transport Corps, thus showing that these commissions were regarded as equivalent to commissions in the regular army. In proof of that, he might state that not loss than thirty-one of his clients who had been noncommissioned officers in the artillery had accepted commissions in the Land Transport Corps, though, had they not done so, they would have been entitled to commissions in the army. The cases of some of the petitioners were attended with peculiar hardships, and this was more especially the ease with Captain Stephens. That gentleman had served ten years in the regular army, and for his services in China had received a decoration. At his own request he obtained his discharge, but upon the Russian war breaking out, he entered the Land Transport Corps as a private. On account of his energy and zeal in the service, he was very soon promoted, and placed in a responsible situation, and during the time he was connected with the corps he was instrumental in raising more than 2,000 recruits. Throughout the war in the Crimea he served with credit and distinction, and upon his return was placed upon half-pay. Now, there were twelve officers who, like Captain Stephens, had been promoted from civil life, and all of them had been treated in a manner totally different from that in which officers promoted from the military ranks had been treated. True, those who came from civil life had been given half-pay at the regular rate settled by the War Office Warrant of 1854; but it was only for a temporary period, and at the end of two or three years, those who were included in that class would find themselves turned altogether adrift without any pay whatever. There were besides, some sixty or seventy applicants, who, from being noncommissioned officers had, by reason of their good conduct, long services, and approved gallantry, been promoted from the ranks, and they now came to this House as petitioners, and entreated at its hands that justice should be done to them. One of these officers (Captain McGonery) had been a sergeant-major, and as such would have been entitled to 2s. 6d. a day. He now received 5s. a day, so that all he had made by his promotion was 2s. 6d. a day, and everybody would at once see that he was placed in a much worse position than he would have been, had he remained sergeant-major. Another was Lieutenant Brooks. He served first in the Grenadiers, and afterwards joined the Land Transport Corps, in which he greatly distinguished himself in the Crimea. His own opinion was, that these officers had a perfect right to be placed on the regular half-pay list; and if his right hon. and gallant Friend the Secretary for War persisted in adhering to the present arrangement, and declined to place them in that position, he trusted the House would support him in the Motion which he now begged to propose—that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the justice of the petitioners' complaint, that they had not received the rate of half-pay to which they state they are entitled to claim.

MR. COWAN, in seconding the Motion, observed that a petition had been put into his hands from Captain Handyside, of the Artillery, who got his commission in 1855, and who complained that he had been unjustly treated. He had performed his duties in an honourable and efficient manner, and had the highest testimonials, and to all appearance the gallant officer did not complain of the treatment he had received without good reason. The pledge held out to him had not been kept. As the present Government was in the habit of consenting to Motions of any kind from either side of the House, he trusted they would not disagree to this one. Great as was the demand for a reduction of expenditure, the people of this country did not wish to see the brave men, who had freely spilt their blood for them in the Crimea and on the plains of India, treated in a shabby and stingy manner.

Amendment proposed,— To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words, "a Select Committee he appointed to inquire into the allegations of the Petition presented to this House on the 11th day of August, 1857, from the Officers of the Land Transport Corps, and into the justice of the Petitioners' complaints, that they have not received the rate of half-pay which they state they are entitled to claim," instead thereof.

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

said his right hon. and gallant friend, the Secretary for War, having already spoken on the question that the Speaker do leave the Chair, could not address the House again, but he understood from his right hon. and gallant Friend that he had no objection to grant the Committee asked for by his noble Friend. If the Motion were to be agreed to now, however, it would be as an Amendment upon the Motion for going into Committee of Supply. He would put it to the noble Lord, therefore, whether he had not better withdraw his Amendment, upon the understanding that the Committee should be granted on a future evening, and thus avoid the inconvenience of preventing the House now going into Committee of Supply.

COLONEL NORTH

said he wished to express his concurrence in the observations which had fallen from the noble Lord, and he was sure that the House must feel that gratitude was due to a class of persons who had shown themselves to be second to none in devotion to their country and loyalty to their Queen.

SIR JOHN RAMSDEN

observed that, as this case occurred during the time when he had the honour to represent the War Department in that House, he felt that he was more responsible for the treatment which these officers met with than the right hon. and gallant General opposite, and as the noble Lord seemed to have fallen into some misconception on the subject, he trusted he might be allowed to say a few words as to the manner in which these officers had been treated. In doing so he wished to echo every word that had fallen from the noble Lord in their praise, as they had been of the greatest service to the country at the time when their long experience as non-commissioned officers was peculiarly valuable, and he was sure that neither this House nor the late Government would have consented to any course that would bear the aspect of treating them in a manner different from that to which their services entitled them. There were two classes of these officers, hut the majority of them were non-commissioned officers, promoted from the ranks of the army. It was in 1854 that the Land Transport Corps was raised, and at the close of the war they were disbanded, there being no further occasion for their services. They had then performed scarcely two years' service as commissioned officers, and by the War-office regulations were not entitled to anything beyond a temporary pension. He might also add that the Secretary for War, as the interpreter of those regulations, had no power by his own authority to alter them in the least degree. His noble Friend, the late Secretary for War, finding that he could not do more for these officers than grant them temporary half pay at the ordinary rate for two or three years, thought that their long services entitled them to greater consideration, and consequently submitted the case to the Lords of the Treasury, who could grant permission to any Department of Government to give a higher rate of pay, under certain circumstances, than was allowed by the established regulations. The Lords of the Treasury considered the case, and consented, on the very strong and urgent representations of the late Secretary for War, to allow these officers to commute their temporary half-pay for a permanent half-pay at a slightly diminished rate. The noble Lord seemed to complain that these officers were not well-used, because they were not treated in the same way as other non-commissioned officers promoted from the ranks. How, then, would the latter have been treated? Why, they would have received a rather higher rate of half-pay, but it would have been temporary, and at the end of three years, at most, it would have ceased, and the officers would have been turned adrift without a claim to one shilling. If the gallant officer, the present Secretary for War consented to the Committee, it was not for him (Sir J. Ramsden) to object, and the Committee would see that the late Secretary, in the manner in which he dealt with these officers, was actuated by a desire to afford them the very best treatment in his power to obtain.

MR. P. O'BRIEN

said he thought that these officers bad more than a mere financial objection to make to the mode in which they had been treated; for, he, understood, from documents furnished to him, that when the Land Transport Corps was abolished and the Military Train established, the officers of the former, instead of being transferred to the latter, by which the half pay would have been saved, were set aside, and Commissions in the Military Train were given to officers from the Turkish Contingent, and even to Commissariat clerks.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said he thought the case was one which should rather be left to the Secretary for War to dispose of than to a Committee of that House. He did not desire to do injustice to any officer or soldier who had rendered service to his country, but he trusted the Secretary for War would not be influenced by continual demands for money. He would do the officers of the Navy the justice to say that they never came forward with these demands for money, but were satisfied with the established regulations.

LORD ADOLPHUS VANE-TEMPEST

said that, relying on the assurance of the light hon. Gentleman that the Committee would be granted, he should, for the present withdraw his Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Main Question put, and agreed to.

House in Committee.

MR. FITZROY in the Chair.