SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES.

HC Deb 04 August 1881 vol 264 cc877-912

SUPPLY—considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

(1.) £52,400, Divine Service.

COLONEL ALEXANDER

said, he was not going to raise any objection to this Vote, but merely desired to make a suggestion to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War. There was a certain number of military chaplaincies provided for in this Vote which were in the gift of official personages, amongst these were the chaplaincy of the Tower and the chaplaincy of the Royal Hospital, Chelsea. With regard to these, it seemed to him that it was rather an anomaly that they should not be in the gift of the Secretary of State for War. He had nothing whatever to say against the manner in which these offices had been filled up. The present chaplains were both known to him; they were Army chaplains, although by no means senior chaplains of the Army, and it therefore seemed to him that it would be advantageous if the Secretary of State for War would take these appointments into his own special patronage, and reserve them in future for men who had for many years served their country at home and abroad. He reminded the right hon. Gentleman that there were very few prizes for Army chaplains who had to retire from the Service in the full vigour of their age.

MR. CHILDERS

said, the question raised by the hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite should be looked into.

Vote agreed to.

(2.) £39,800, Administration of Military Law.

SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT

asked the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the fact that the charges for a number of officials under this Vote were given in a lump sum, instead of in detail. For instance, there was one item of £9,229, which represented the pay of the Governors, chief warders, warders, assistant warders, messengers, and others, at the military prisons. The same observations applied to the charge for the pay of the provost staff and military police, £7,000; and likewise to the item of £5,000 for the pay and extra duty pay of provost marshals and military police in garrisons and camps. He failed to see any reason why these items should not be given separately in detail, and trusted that in future the Estimate would be framed on that principle.

MR. CHILDERS

said, he would look into the subject to which his attention had been drawn by the hon. and gallant Baronet opposite, with the view, if possible, of giving the desired information.

COLONEL ALEXANDER

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman could do anything to improve the cumbrous and clumsy procedure now adopted in general courts martial. The Committee might possibly not be aware of the dilatory way in which the proceedings in these cases were conducted. Every question originated, either by the prosecution, by the prisoner, or by any member of the court, must, in the first instance, be reduced to writing; it had then to be passed to the Judge Advocate and the President, and, if approved by them, it was then read aloud; but, if it was not approved, it was returned to the person who propounded it. In the case of Colonel Crawley the delay was so intolerable that the two sides came to an arrangement with regard to the questions; and, as stated in The Times, after a few days, the plan was adopted of allowing each party to read its own questions. He remembered that the right hon. and learned Gentleman the present Home Secretary, who appeared for the defence, was, according to the present practice, which permitted a lawyer to advise the prisoner but not himself to address the court, not allowed to read the speech which he had prepared on the occasion, and which, being read by another, suf- fered very much in consequence. He was aware that these things did not occur very often; but still they were not so infrequent as not to deserve attention. The Committee would remember that last year a sergeant was tried for fraud, in connection with the marking at Wimbledon; and he ventured to say that the questions which had occupied the court martial for so many days in that case would have been settled in one by a civil court. He should be glad if the right hon. Gentleman could see his way to remedy this form of procedure.

MR. CHILDERS

said, he was much obliged to the hon. and gallant Gentleman for calling attention to the subject. Under the Army Discipline and Regulation Act of 1870 it became necessary to draw up a totally new set of rules, which would very much simplify the procedure of courts martial; and the Government had had to consider whether these rules should be included in the Bill introduced a few nights since—the Regulation of Forces Bill—or whether they should wait until the Bill was passed, and then establish one simple and entire Code. The rules were finished, and would be issued before the end of the year. With regard to the point raised by the hon. and gallant Gentleman, he should mention that he was himself rather in advance of the opinions of some hon. Members.

SIR PATRICK O'BRIEN

said, he had given Notice some time ago of a Motion for a Return of courts martial; but the Secretary of State for War had not seen his way to grant it. He thought the present was not an unfitting occasion on which again to call attention to the subject, and to ask what objection there was to a Return of the punishments awarded by courts martial being furnished. It might be urged that this Return would draw invidious distinctions between some regiments; but, for his own part, he could see no reason why contrasts should not be made between one regiment and another in respect of the punishments awarded by courts martial. On the contrary, he thought the Return would be of great use in drawing the attention of commanding officers to the position of the various regiments. There might, of course, be reasons why the authorities should refuse the Return he asked for; but the question, at any rate, was one upon which information should be afforded.

MR. CHILDERS

said, he would rather see the Return asked for by his hon. Friend included in the General Annual Return of the British Army than given separately. The Return would be very voluminous; but his hon. Friend might rely that the subject should receive his attention.

SIR ALEXANDER GORDON

pointed out that the present system of procedure in courts martial was very much in favour of the prisoner. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be content with the changes he had already made this year in Army affairs.

Vote agreed to.

(3.) £300,500,MedicalEstablishments and Services.

SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT

said, here, again, the whole charge for the pay of the officers in this Department were lumped together in one sum of £227,723. As he had said before, there was no reason whatever why the Committee should not know what these officers received. Further details were also desirable in the case of Netley Hospital on page 30.

MR. CHILDERS

said, he believed that if the hon. and gallant Baronet would refer to the Appendix he would find there much of the detail that he desired. At the same time, he would look further into the matter.

SIR HARRY VERNEY

hoped the right hon. Gentleman would see that the class of men best qualified for the duty were placed in the position of hospital attendants. Short service men were, in his opinion, not the best for the purpose of nursing soldiers; and he thought that when men were found to be good orderlies they ought to be retained in that position.

MR. FINDLATER

wished to urge upon the Secretary of State for War the claims of the Army medical officers. Many of these gentlemen, in addition to risking their lives in the field, incurred serious illnesses in the discharge of their duties; and he contended that they should be placed in the same category as combatant officers of the Army. It must be clear to hon. Members that the medical officer who, without the excitement to support him which was felt by the combatant officer, really displayed the highest degree of true courage in attending to the wounded. The records of our recent wars furnished many instances of the bravery displayed by medical officers, the terrible risks they ran, and the sacrifice of life in action which their duties entailed upon them. But these officers, although running the same risks as their combatant brethren, for the simple reason that they were non-combatant, were deprived of the privilege conferred upon other officers of the Army by the Army Circular of March, 1880, in respect of counting time not exceeding one year on half-pay towards voluntary retirement. The right hon. Gentleman had, on a former occasion, promised to look into this matter; and he could assure him that it was very desirable that some steps should be taken, because, undoubtedly, great discontent existed amongst the medical officers of the Army, who felt strongly the invidious distinction that was drawn between them and the combatant officers in the Service. He trusted the right hon. Gentleman would hold out some hope to these very deserving gentlemen that, at an early day, he would be able to do something for them.

MR. CHILDERS

said, he considered that the proposal of the hon. Member, that medical officers should be placed on the same footing as combatant officers, would involve a great disadvantage to them, inasmuch as they were, in some respects, as compared with combatant officers, much better treated. The Regulations with regard to medical officers had been settled by his Predecessor with extreme care and after long consideration; and, on the whole, he believed that the alteration proposed by the hon. Member would place them in a worse position than they now occupied.

Vote agreed to.

(4.) £476,900, Militia and Militia Reserve.

EARL PERCY

said, he rose to call attention to a subject upon which he had before asked a question of the right hon. Gentleman, and which had excited considerable interest amongst the officers of Militia regiments. It had been for a long time past the custom of the Government of the day to make constant changes in the uniforms of the Army and Militia; and during the years he had served in the latter branch he had in consequence of these Regulations, changed the character of almost every garment once or twice. Now, these repeated alterations were not only vexatious in themselves, but they were the source of very serious expense to officers whose means were rather limited. In the present instance, it was proposed to change the whole of the uniforms of the Militia, and to assimilate them to the uniforms of the linked battalions of the Regular Forces of the district. He had, through the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets, addressed a question to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War, as to whether the proposed change would not entail upon the officers of the Militia the very serious cost of £ 80,000; and the answer received from him was to the effect that he had, to a great extent, exaggerated the expense which it would entail—that he had no reason to believe that the expense would approach the sum named, and that in many cases but a small outlay would be necessary. He would not enter upon a lengthy discussion on the expediency of the proposed change; but, for his own part, he was quite unable to see the advantage of dressing the Militia officer in borrowed plumage. Although he was aware that his opinions upon this subject were not shared by all the officers of the Militia, yet it was hardly correct of the right hon. Gentleman to say that the proposed alterations had been received with general approval, because he had received many representations from Militia officers that they extremely disliked them. Nor was it a correct statement to say that the substitution of gold for silver lace had been recommended by the Committee, because their Report did not contain one word about any change in this respect. They pointed out that, in their opinion, a strong ground existed for establishing similarity of colour, and that it seemed a question whether the Militia should not be clothed in the undress of the Regular regiments. But that was quite a different thing. His estimate of £80,000 as the cost to the officers of the Militia of making the alterations contemplated by the authorities was arrived at by taking £20 as the cost to each officer, and multiplying that figure by 4,000—the number of officers in the Militia. He had, in consequence of the statement of the right hon. Gentleman that his estimate was incorrect, taken the trouble, by actual experiment, to ascertain the accuracy of the figure of £20, which he had adopted as the basis of this calculation; and he was entitled to say that his estimate was fully borne out by the fact that the amounts quoted by the Army tailors, to whom his inquiries had been addressed, all ranged between £34 8s. 6d. and £30 13s. 9d. for field officers, and £20 0s. 6d. and £18 1s. 6d. for subalterns. Moreover, in addition to his estimate of £20 for each officer, there would be special extra expenses in assimilating the Militia uniform to that of particular regiments of the Regular Forces. As an instance of which he would mention the cost of £5 5s. for a new bearskin in the case of Light Infantry battalions assimilated to Fusilier regiments. Now, considering that the Militia were only in training for a month during the year, the change must necessarily be a very gradual one, and, besides the hardship of compelling them to incur this great expense, there would be the disadvantage that it would take many years before the officers of the Militia were all dressed alike. The variety of costume which would result from this would be intolerable; and if the change must really be carried out, he would put it to the right hon. Gentleman whether it should not be effected more rapidly than was proposed. It was most desirable that no slur should be cast upon the officers of the Militia; and, therefore, he entreated that the points to which he had invited the attention of the Secretary of State for War should receive his serious consideration. The proposed changes would undoubtedly throw a great strain upon the Militia, and any help which the right hon. Gentleman could give would be thankfully accepted, and would, at the same time, tend to efficiency and to the preservation of good feeling and esprit de corps.

COLONEL KINGSCOTE

said, he thought the noble Lord the Member for North Northumberland (Earl Percy) had done much good in bringing forward this matter. For his own part, he was at a loss to see the object of the authorities in making this change, one result of which would undoubtedly be that for years Militia officers would be dressed some in one uniform and some in another. If he could be made to under- stand the reason for the proposed alteration, it might possibly meet with his approval. The change would throw a considerable expense on the Militia officers, and particularly on the mounted officers, for which he thought they should certainly receive some compensation. He was himself an honorary colonel of the Militia; and, as an old soldier, he regarded that branch of the Service as most valuable. It had been called upon by the country more than once, and it had never been found wanting. It supplied the Army with recruits; and he rejoiced that endeavours were being made to amalgamate it more closely with the Regular Forces. But why, he asked, was this burden of expense to be cast upon the officers of Militia without compensation? He trusted that the right hon. Gentleman would reconsider this matter, and that the few remarks he had felt it his duty to make would have the good effect of obtaining compensation for the officers in question, if the change proposed must indeed be carried out.

MAJOR CHESTER-MASTER

said, he entirely agreed with the hon. and gallant Gentleman who had just spoken (Colonel Kingscote). He had been for 21 years in the Militia, and he could assure the right hon. Gentleman that there were reasons, beyond those which had been advanced, which tended to show that by the contemplated changes the Militia would be placed in an unfair position. It appeared that the lace and facings of the uniforms were to be changed; and he would point out, as the result of the inquiries he had made, that the cost of this alone would amount to £30 in the case of colonels, and £15 for second lieutenants, the other ranks being in proportion. He also pointed out that a new uniform was incumbent on an officer of the Line when he retired from his regiment and joined the Militia, but that it was not so in the case of the Yeomanry and Volunteers. He could not see the reason for this inequality. It appeared to him only fair, as the Militia were made one with the Line, that the same benefits should be enjoyed by both with regard to promotion.

SIR HARRY VERNEY

said, he could see no reason whatever for making the proposed changes of uniform in respect of the Militia. What possible advantage could there be in putting the crown on the shoulder-strap instead of on. the collar? The crown and other marks of rank were more visible on the collar than on the shoulder-strap, and less likely to be rubbed by the cloak. These alterations had imposed a tax never less than £5, and up to £30, on every officer. He could only suppose that they were proposed at the instance of the Army tailors. For his own part, he was in favour of a very simple and inexpensive uniform; and he pointed out that the efficiency of some foreign armies was in no way secured by the quantity of lace displayed.

SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT

said, that ever since he commenced soldiering there had been one constant complaint that perpetual changes were being made for no purpose whatever. He could not but think that the right hon. Gentleman would do well to leave these matters in relation to the Army and Militia as they existed at present. But he rose principally to ask the right hon. Gentleman to state his views with regard to the advantage to be derived by the country from the formation of territorial regiments composed of two battalions of the Regular Army and two battalions of the Militia. He would be glad to know in what way the War Office were going to make use of the two Militia battalions, and how they were going to draw more closely the connection between the Militia and the Army. Certainly, he did not think that this close intimacy would be promoted by merely placing gold lace upon the uniforms of the Militia officers. Again, what was to be done with the two Militia battalions in case of imminent danger to the country? Did the right hon. Gentleman intend to make it compulsory that the men should go into the Army, or did he expect to get more volunteers for the Army than he had before? There was an opinion abroad to which he would refer on the present occasion, because it was one which ought either to be contradicted or affirmed, that it was the deliberate intention of the War Office to do away with the officers of the Militia as they now existed, and to place in the Militia officers who had retired from the Army on half-pay. That was a question as to which he should very much like to receive an answer from the right hon. Gentleman. The proceeding might be wise, or it might be one of those things which were inevitable; but, whatever might be the truth with regard to it, he thought it should be at once clearly stated in what way the Militia was to be dealt with. He believed that a far larger Army Reserve could be got out of the Militia Reserve than out of the Reserves that it was now attempted to create. He believed the Army and Militia Reserves might be amalgamated with advantage, and that they ought to be annually drilled with those regiments with which they would have to serve in case of emergency. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would state his views upon that question. There was another point to which he would refer. In places where there were not two regiments of Militia, was it the intention that a second regiment should be formed? Because there were many places where there was only one weak regiment, and yet it was said to consist of two battalions. He wished again to suggest that the Militia Reserve and the Line Reserve might be called out and drilled together, so that when they joined their regiments they would know each other and also their officers. It was a great object, when men were sent on foreign service, that they should know their officers; but, as the Reserves were formed, he would undertake to say they would not know their officers, and recent occurrences showed what disastrous consequences would occur. Another matter was this. He was informed that when the 3rd and 4th Battalions of the Royal Lancashire Militia were out they had no waterproof sheets provided for them, and everything they had was saturated with rain. Such a thing ought never to occur in this country; and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would inform the Committee how such an occurrence could have taken place.

MR. CHILDERS

said, with regard to the amalgamation of the two Militia battalions with the two Line battalions, he would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the Report of the Committee in 1876, presided over by his right hon. and gallant Predecessor (Colonel Stanley), which strongly recommended the combination, by which they hoped to effect a better system of recruiting, both from the Militia to the Line and to the Line direct. Those arrangements would strengthen both the Militia and the Line; and he hoped the time was not far distant when it would be more practicable to attach the Reserve men residing in the regimental district to the regiment in their district, instead of the men having to belong to regiments scattered all over the country, and not knowing where to go when called out. It was one of the objects of the combination that the men should have no doubt upon that point when called out either in an emergency or for training. He believed a great advantage would be gained by amalgamating the two battalions of the Line. With regard to the question of uniform, although that was of less importance than some other considerations, he believed that if the uniform was practically the same that would tend to attach the men of the Militia battalion to the Line battalion, for they would feel that they belonged to the four battalions, with headquarters at the place from which the regiment drew its men. As to the number of field officers in the Militia, the whole system of promotion and retirement in the Militia was distinctly different from that in the Line. In the Line the age of retirement was much earlier than in the Militia. With respect to the question raised by the noble Lord (Earl Percy), the experience of the War Office was that there was a great desire on the part of the officers in the Militia to have the same uniform as the Line. There was no intention to change the dress of the Yeomanry this year; and, with regard to the question of the hon. and gallant Member for East Aberdeenshire (Sir Alexander Gordon) respecting the change made some months back in the uniform of officers, that was a matter with which the Secretary of State had nothing to do; and he could, therefore, give the House no practical information upon it. But, in consequence of representations made to him, he had given an order that no further alteration of the kind should be made without the sanction of the Secretary of State for War.

SIR HERBERT MAXWELL

wished to draw attention to a matter of more importance than the difference between gold and silver lace. As at present carried on, the musketry instruction in the Militia was nothing but a farce. The time of training was necessarily very short, and might very fairly be occupied by ordinary drill, without any laborious and delicate work such as musketry instruction. Of the 27 days allowed for training, three must be set aside as Sundays, one or two days were absorbed in settling into camp, or barracks, or billets, four days must be allowed at the end of the period for inspection and leaving quarters. There was thus very little time for drill and musketry instruction. A few years ago an officer in command of a company out for training was ordered, on a certain evening, to take his company to a range five miles distant on the following morning and fire 20 rounds. The company consisted of 113 men, and for that number to fire 20 rounds each in a single day was a farce if it was supposed to be done at all properly. No means of transport were provided, and the officer had to transport the men at his own expense, and to provide rations of bread and cheese at the range. He made no complaint of the expense; but he felt it humiliating to have to hurry the men through the instruction in that way. That was only a sample of what took place in every battalion of the Service; and the only way out of that system was either to give up musketry instruction, entirely, or to call out each company during the non-training period for leisurely instruction in musketry, with every necessary facility, or, again, to have alternate annual trainings for field exercise and musketry.

SIR ALEXANDER GORDON

said, he wished to draw attention to the question of assimilating the two corps in the field when in action. Five mounted officers had lately been added to every Infantry battalion; but it now appeared that that increase was not for the performance of duties in the field, but merely for the sake of promotion. If that was the case, he believed the time would come when the House of Commons would not allow the addition of mounted officers not for the performance of duties, but for the sake merely of promotion. The system of drill for the Infantry must now be changed to suit the increased mounted officers. The same drill ought, therefore, to be applied to the Militia; otherwise, the Militia and the Line would not be able to act together in the field at the critical time. It would be too late, when the Militia were called out to defend the country, to assimilate them by adding the same number of mounted officers and the same system of drill. The two corps could not act together as one brigade unless their drill was identical; and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would consider the point.

LORD EUSTACE CECIL

said, he had little sympathy with the noble Earl (Earl Percy) as to the question of clothing, for everyone in the Army knew that changes of dress were more for the benefit of the tailors than anyone else. He thought there might be a service dress as well as a dress for the ball-room; and he wished to suggest that the kersey dress used by officers might be used for drill. Officers who wanted a smart dress could have it at their own expense. Then, with regard to the number of the Militia, the total at the training in 1880 was 115,307; but the maximum voted by Parliament was 139,000. That showed a deficiency of over 23,000 men, and he wished to urge the right hon. Gentleman to adopt some way of bringing up the attendance of the Militia to the maximum voted by Parliament. There had been an improvement in the number of Militia officers who had obtained certificates; but he wished to know the proportion of field officers who had passed in the same way; for now that the Militia was to be amalgamated more or less with the Line, it was essential that the field officers and captains should be equal in every respect to the same officers in the Line.

SIR HENRY FLETCHER

wished to know what arrangements had been made for giving proper quarters to Militia adjutants? They were appointed from the brigade depots; but when they joined the Militia they had to give up their quarters, and put up with one room. That ought to be inquired into; and he also wished to know whether any further remuneration would be given to them, as to the depot brigade adjutants.

MR. RITCHIE

said, he wished to draw attention to the question of second battalions of Militia. In his regiment there was some difficulty in raising a sufficient number of men for the single battalion the regiment had, and he did not see how these second battalions were to be raised, unless some steps were taken in that direction. He hoped, further, that the right hon. Gentleman would not adopt the suggestion of the noble Lord for a cheaper dress. There ought to be a uniform laid down for officers of Militia, and it ought to be a sine quâ non that all such officers should obtain the full uniform. He agreed that the proposed change in the uniform was one that was desired by Militia officers generally, for they were extremely anxious to be identified as much as possible with their brethren of the Line. The question of uniform might be considered, a sentimental one; but to his mind it would be a good thing to increase the sympathy between the Militia and the Line by rendering the uniforms identical. The hon. Member who had brought the matter forward had reason, he thought, to be satisfied with the assurance the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Childers) had given him, and his noble Friend might reasonably conclude that all he desired would be carried out. No doubt it was the desire of the Militia officers that their uniforms should be the same as those of the Line; but, he presumed, it was not merely because of the desire of those officers that the change would be made. It would be made in the interest of the Service; therefore, he did not think the Militia officers should be called on to bear the whole of the expense.

COLONEL ALEXANDER

said, he would not take up the time of the Committee for more than two minutes; but he wished to say that the Report of the Inspectors of Musketry recently issued as to the Militia fully bore out all that had been said by the hon. Member for Wigtownshire (Sir Herbert Maxwell). The Report said that though one or two regiments were good in rifle practice, notably the South Wales Borderers and the Wiltshire Regiment, the firing, altogether, was not satisfactory. The Report referred to the insufficiency of the musketry drills; and hon. Members had only to look at the Army Re-turns published this year to convince themselves of the fact that there was not enough spent on musketry practice. The Inspector General of Musketry said that in some individual cases the firing was good; but the volley firing was very unsatisfactory. Why was the individual firing satisfactory? It was because individuals who were good shots were nursed and coddled beyond all concep- tion. The musketry instructors thought only of their averages. Their whole ideas were concentrated upon averages, just as some hon. Members looked to their averages in divisions. At Alder-shot, there was a flag put up to say when regiments should fire and when they should not. Sometimes the firing was discontinued for days and days together, the weather seeming beautiful. They might be at a loss to account for it, and might ask a question about it, when the answer they would receive would be something like this—"There is a strong wind blowing from the left rear." But that strong wind might be blowing from the left rear for months and months. No doubt, there was a strong wind blowing from the left rear during the battle of Majuba Hill; and the Boers, unfortunately, would not wait until that wind changed. The system pursued was thoroughly antiquated, only 90 rounds a-year being allowed, and that was clearly not enough. The Volunteers fired 2,000 rounds, and that was not too much. There had been some alteration made in the Regulations, he believed; 10 rounds less in volley firing, and 10 more in skirmishing being allowed; but the fact remained the same, that 90 rounds were insufficient. Our Army was one of the most expensive in the world, and that being so, no pains should be spared to render it efficient. However unpleasant the fact was, they must face it, and it was this—that our soldiers were the very worst shots of any army in the world. There was one other point on which he wished to say a word—one which had been referred to by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War—namely, the new rules as to retirement in the Militia. It appeared that the right hon. Gentleman had been dealing rather tenderly with commanding officers in the Militia, in allowing them to serve on to the age of 67 in command of regiments, when they knew that field officers of the Line retired at the age of 55. Eventually, he knew, that would not be the ease; but he was talking now of present commanding officers, who were to retire absolutely at 67. He found fault with the provision in the Regulations which followed that fixing the age, and which dealt with special cases. He was afraid this provision would open the door to a great deal of jobbery. What were special cases? Were men to be retained because they were thoroughly good officers, or because they were county men? How was the general officer commanding a district to decide upon the special cases? They were throwing a very unpleasant duty on the general officer, and he was sure that would not work. The Department should make a rule and abide by it; but there had hitherto been a rule that officers should retire at the age of 60, and that rule, as he had been told the other day, had not been carried out. He was afraid that, in a similar way, they would find out that this new Regulation would not be carried out. He wished, further, to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it was true, as reported, that the recruiting for the Militia had fallen off lately, in consequence of the men being called up for training immediately on enlistment? The Militia Committee had expressed an opinion on this matter, and he wished to know if the Report in question was correct?

MR. CHILDERS

I saw a statement similar to that now made by the hon. and gallant Member in the newspapers the other day, and I asked if it was true. I was told that it could not be, and for the best of all reasons, that the new system has not yet been put into operation. I quite agree with a deal of that which has fallen from the hon. and gallant Member with respect to the musketry practice of the Militia and the Line. Something ought to be done to improve it; and, feeling this very strongly, some months ago, as the Committee are aware, I appointed a Committee, presided over by Sir Daniel Lysons, to consider the subject, and that Committee has been inquiring into it with great patience and great care, both in regard to the Regular Army and the Militia. It is not, to my mind, a question which should be lost sight of. As for our soldiers being the worst shots in the world, I cannot agree with that. There are, at least, two Continental Armies whose shooting is far worse than that of our Army; but, at the same time, there are other Armies whose shooting, no doubt, is better. The British Army should not be behindhand in this matter, and I have reason to believe that the Committee will make such a Report as will enable us at the War Office to introduce great improvements into the whole system of musketry instruction. With regard to retirement from the Militia, the change has not been made on the ground of economy.

SIR ALEXANDER GORDON

said, it was not as a matter of economy that he had raised that objection, but as a matter of numbers and efficiency in the field.

MR. CHILDERS

If the arrangement is challenged, I shall be able to show that it was not made for purposes of economy. A question has been put to me about adjutants of Militia, and their position has been compared with that of adjutants at the depot. The question has not been before me, but I will look into it. I know nothing about additional uniforms for the Militia.

LORD EUSTACE CECIL

said, he did not think the right hon. Gentleman had quite understood his suggestion, which was that, there being two uniforms, one of blue—in which all the Militia officers, he believed, performed their drill—and one of red, the young officers, who had to wait a year or two years before going into Regular Line regiments, should be only called upon to provide themselves with blue uniforms, and should not be forced to get the red.

MR. CHILDERS

I must confess that I am not familiar with this point; but I promise the noble Lord to look into the matter. The hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ritchie) said I had not answered the question put to me by an hon. Gentleman behind me. Yes; we do wish to encourage the formation of a second Militia battalion where such does not exist now, in, of course, those districts where the formation of a second battalion is feasible. One difficulty with which I am met in the matter is this—that where proposals have been made to raise that second battalion, they have been accompanied, generally, with awkward questions as to interfering with the recruiting ground of other Militia battalions. I should be loth to form second battalions where there was a serious difficulty of this kind. I may say that I am anxious to get both the Militia and the Militia Reserve up to their full numbers.

MAJOR-GENERAL BURNABY

said, that with regard to musketry practice he could not agree that ours was the worst shooting Army in Europe. Perhaps the Militia were not as good marksmen as the hon. and gallant Member (Colonel Alexander) and himself (General Burnaby) could wish; but the Militia did not have those advantages which were given to the Army, and which, he trusted, shortly would be conferred upon them. The present system was to "cram" the men in this respect—if he might be allowed to use the word. He trusted that this would be altered, and that the men would not be compelled to fire a certain large number of rounds within a short space of time. The number of rounds appointed to be fired should be distributed over a certain number of months in the year. Then, as to extra ammunition which the men either purchased themselves or were supplied with at their captain's cost, he thought it should be sold at as low a price as possible. The men complained that this ammunition was too dear for the purpose, and that the Government charged for it more than it cost them to manufacture. This ammunition should be supplied at as low a price as possible, for the lower the price the greater would be the number of shots fired, and the greater the number of shots fired the more efficient would the men be. As to the change of badges, facings, and in some cases head-dress, of certain regiments, in order to adapt them to the territorial system, the cost was one which should not be borne by the officers, but by the State. In Leicestershire, the 45th and 17th Regiments and the Militia were put together under the territorial arrangement. The 45th had no badge, but the 17th happened to have a tiger; whilst the Militia regiment had a harp, and was sore at having to give it up. They did not know why they should have a tiger any more than an elephant. The harp was an emblem which they very much respected, owing to their connection with Ireland, and they hoped they might be able to retain it, not only as a matter of sentiment, but also for economical reasons.

MR. O'SHEA

wished to put a question with regard to the quartermasters' quarters, because, he believed, the same thing would occur in regard to the Militia as would occur in the Army. A Memorandum of the Horse Guards gave quartermasters a right to field officers' quarters, so that a quartermaster just promoted from the ranks had a right to similar quarters to captains of 20 years' standing. There was great complaint about this.

MR. CHILDERS

I have done a great deal for the quartermasters; but I doubt whether the complaint the hon. and gallant Member speaks of is one of importance.

MR. ROUND

wished to know whether, in the case of Rifle Militia regiments, where a change of uniform was determined on, the same allowances would be made by the Government as it was understood had been made in the case of Highland regiments of Militia under similar circumstances? He would also like to know whether field officers of Militia, who had retired with permission to wear their uniform, might continue to wear that uniform, although it had been changed in the case of their regiment?

MR. CHILDERS

I will consider the question of allowing a change of uniform on retirement. With regard to the Rifle Brigade, as I have said, allowance will be made to them for the difference.

EARL PERCY

begged to thank the right hon. Gentleman for the manner in which he had met his appeal. If the change proposed was a good one, it should be made whether the Militia officers liked it or not; and, if those officers had a claim on the Government for assistance in paying for their uniforms, that claim should be met.

MR. CHILDERS

The Government having made the concessions they have made, should hardly be asked now to make others.

SIR ROBERT LOYD LINDSAY

said, that before the right hon. Gentleman proceeded to add a second battalion to existing battalions, he hoped he would take an opportunity of informing himself whether such additions would be advantageous in the individual districts. The right hon. Gentleman should call for a Report from the commander of each battalion and ask him to state whether, in forming the second battalion, injury would not be done to the first battalion. The same thing should be done in the case of the Volunteers. In his district they could not find in the county officers sufficient to officer two battalions of Militia and Volunteers; and he was under the impression that in forming second battalions the first battalions would suffer.

Vote agreed to.

(5.) £73,900, Yeomanry Cavalry.

SIR ALEXANDER GORDON

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether he could not so organize the Service as to render the existing number of adjutants in the Yeomanry unnecessary? In the Cavalry there were only 19 adjutants on duty all the year round; but in the Yeomanry there were no less than 39. By a better organization, also, something else besides the annual eight days' training might be found for the adjutants to do. They were only at work eight days, and during the rest of the year they were paid for doing nothing. [An hon. MEMBER: It is a mistake.] It was no mistake at all. They only attended the training, and he did think some plan might be adopted by which greater economy and more perfect organization might be secured. Surely the duty that was performed by 19 adjutants in the Cavalry all the year round could be peformed in the Yeomanry for only eight days in the year by a similar number.

SIR THOMAS ACLAND

said, he was no advocate for the Yeomanry as it at present existed; but he could assure the Committee that both the officers and men took a great deal of trouble to render themselves efficient. The hon. and gallant Member (Sir Alexander Gordon) said the adjutants were only up for eight days in the year; but that was not the fact. He had known an adjutant at work for a month going amongst the men and instructing them in shooting and other matters. If a regiment was to be properly kept up they must have an adjutant who would give the necessary amount of attention to it.

Vote agreed to.

(6.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £540,500, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Volunteer Corps Pay and Allowances, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1882.

SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT

said, that, in the first place, he wished publicly to thank the right hon. Gentleman opposite—and in so doing he was expressing the feeling of the whole Volunteer Force—for the way in which the Volunteers had been treated at the recent Review at Windsor, not only by the right hon. Gentleman himself, but by the War Office and the Horse Guards. The Volunteers had done their best to show what they were worth and what they were made of, and they had been well backed up by the Staff; and he would venture to say that nothing could have been better arranged, not only for the reception of the different corps at the different stations, but also for their despatch from those stations. Every civility and attention was shown, the most complicated arrangements were admirably carried out, and, in fact, nothing was omitted which made up the sum and substance of a most successful Review. The Staff showed that they had the interests of the Service at heart; and he trusted the right hon. Gentleman and the officials with whom he was associated were of opinion that discipline, which was so essential to the well-being of the force, had been well maintained. It was essential that the Volunteers should go into camp every year. The Volunteer Force to be useful must be efficient and in a good state of discipline; and the only way to effect that was by putting it into camp every year. He was quite sure that money spent in that way would be well spent. He also advised that sergeant instructors should be compelled to go to the depôt centre every year for drill, because they were apt to become rusty. He sent his every year; and he thought such instruction should be given, and at the public expense. There was some doubt as to the retiring allowances and the age in the case of adjutants, and he would like to have some information on that point.

SIB THOMAS ACLAND

said, he was not prepared to say that sending sergeants to the depot would be enough, for although a civilian he had seen a great many sergeant instructors; and, while he had a high respect for their many qualities, there was a great deal to be done in the way of teaching them the art of teaching others.

SIR HENRY FLETCHER

corroborated the hon. Baronet, and wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War if he could not, now that he had taken the Volunteers in hand, do something more for them than had been done during their 22 years of existence? The Volunteers had no greatcoats or water-bottles, and although the commanding officers had put their hands into their pockets very frequently the regiments were still deficient in those necessary articles. With regard to the pay of the adjutants, the old adjutants were in some doubt as to whether they would be placed on the same footing in regard to retirement as Militia adjutants were; and if the right hon. Gentleman could say that they would be placed on the same footing it would give great satisfaction. The Volunteer officers had great difficulty in getting colour-sergeants, because those men were not fully acquainted with what they would receive when they had finished their term of service. In the present system a colour-sergeant, when transferred from a Line regiment to a Volunteer regiment, was simply a sergeant; and what he was anxious to know was whether colour-sergeants, on the completion of their 21 years' service, would receive the pension of a colour-sergeant or simply that of a sergeant?

MR. W. N. NICHOLSON

said, he had been requested to bring before the notice of the Secretary of State for War the claim of Volunteer officers to be exempted from service on juries as a small been which they deserved in acknowledgment of the time they gave to the country. Referring to a recent reply of the Secretary of State for War on this subject, that the rank and file had an equal claim for exemption, he believed it would be found that but few were eligible, and that even if the exemption were extended to the whole body of Volunteers, he thought, considering the comparatively small number, the pressure on the public would be very slight. He regretted to see, under the head of "Miscellaneous Charges" for Volunteers, a reduction of £5,000 this year. Those items included travelling expenses for attendance at camp, regimental drill, and gun practice. Last year the grant was so small that officers complained that many of their men were prevented from attending camp drill because their regiments could not afford it, and he hoped that next year the allowance would be increased. He also urged an increased Capitation Grant to relieve the commanding officers from the disagreeable necessity of having to ask for subscriptions to meet the expenses of their corps.

SIR ROBERT LOYD LINDSAY

also wished to draw attention to the diminution of the allowance for attendance at military camps. The last Secretary of State for War appointed a Committee to inquire into the financial and other conditions of the Volunteer Forces; and amongst other things they considered the question whether the Capitation allowance was sufficient to meet the burdens which were cast on the Volunteers, such as uniforms, ranges, and other items of expense. After very careful consideration, that Committee reported that the Capitation Grant was sufficient with a close economy, but could not bear all those extra charges for camp drill. He therefore recommended that an allowance of 2s. per head should be granted to Volunteers for the six days while they were in camp. Thus, every Volunteer might earn, during encampment, 12s.; but the number of men who were to receive this allowance was limited. Therefore, if a regiment sent 600 men into camp, it might be that only 300 would receive the allowance; and thus, although 2s. per head was given, the result in that case would be, practically, that only 1s. a-head was allowed. He knew that at a time of great pressure in regard to the Estimates the weakest must go to the wall; but he wished to draw attention to this matter now, in the hope that in the future the War Office would give this full allowance to every man who went into camp.

Mr. CHILDERS

begged to thank the hon. and gallant Member for the manner in which he had expressed himself with regard to the concessions made by the War Office to make the Volunteer Service successful. Although a great failure had been anticipated for the Windsor Review, he thought the arrangements that had been made were sufficient to justify the encomiums which were accorded to the War Office. That, however, would have been nothing but for the efficiency of the Volunteers themselves; and he could not speak too strongly of the discipline of the Volunteers and the knowledge shown by their officers at the Review. Since the first Review in the early days of the Volunteer Force, the Volunteers had shown a remarkable improvement; and the result was that at Windsor they had aroused the admiration of not only the general spectators, but of a large number of distinguished and experienced military officers, both English and foreign. Great credit was due to the Railway Companies for the manner in which they conveyed the troops to and from the ground, but far more to the admirable discipline of the men and the experience and skill shown by the officers. With regard to the allowance for attending camps and travelling expenses, the amount taken this year was really the same as last year, taking the two Votes together. A larger number of men had attended the camps this year, and that would have to be considered in framing the Votes for next year. He had no wish to exercise an unwise economy in a matter of that kind, for it was a great advantage to Volunteers to gain experience in camp. With regard to adjutants, Volunteer adjutants would be placed on precisely the same footing as the Militia adjutants. If 55 years of age with 20 years' service they would be retired compulsorily at 10s. a-day. With regard to service on juries, he could not see why a Volunteer officer should have absolute immunity from that duty. But, as a matter of fact, the question had been decided by Act of Parliament, and he had no power to excuse Volunteer officers from serving on juries. He did not see how the privilege could be given to the officers and not to the men; and, if the men were exempted, the exemption of 200,000 men would throw a serious burden upon the rest of the community.

MR. PARNELL

said, he regretted to be obliged to take a division on this Vote; but he must do so on the ground that, although Ireland was compelled to pay a contribution towards the cost of the Volunteer Force in England and Wales, she was not allowed to have a Volunteer Force. This matter had been brought before the House several times, and in dividing against the Vote he did not do so out of any hostility towards the English Volunteers, whom he recognized as a fine body of men of whom this country ought to be proud. But there was no way of separating the amount paid by Ireland from that paid by England, and, consequently, he must divide against the whole Vote. In 1879 a Bill was brought in by Mr. O'Clery for the constitution of a Volunteer Force in Ireland, and passed by the House of Commons; but the House of Lords threw it out after very slight examination. When the Liberal Government came in, and announced their intention to equalize the laws of England and Ireland, it was supposed they would take some steps to remedy this grievance; but now, in their second Session, they seemed to have no intention to give a Volunteer Force to Ireland. The Irish Members were thus obliged to begin again to protest, and the only way to do that was to oppose this Vote.

MR. CHILDERS

said, he admitted that the hon. Gentleman had stated his case in a fair spirit; but he would remind him that there had been a Bill on the subject introduced this Session, upon which the views of the Government might have been stated. The Bill was, however, dropped, and he regretted that, because he had desired such an opportunity of giving the objections of the Government to the formation at this juncture of an Irish Volunteer Force.

MR. T. P. O'CONNOR

said, the Bill alluded to by the right hon. Gentleman was in charge of the junior Member for Tipperary (Mr. P. J. Smyth), who sat on the Ministerial Benches, together with several other Members representing Irish constituencies. It was a remarkable phenomenon that those Gentlemen made proposals, and when the proposals came forward they themselves disappeared. However, he thought the Irish Members might bring in a Bill next Session; and he hoped that the right hon. Gentleman, following the example of the late Government, would give them his support. He objected to the Vote on different grounds from those of his hon. Friend. The Volunteer Force had been described by Sir Garnet Wolseley as a force for increasing the martial spirit of the people. He objected to the martial spirit of the English people; and he thought the increase of their martial spirit was detrimental to the public peace, and essentially hostile to the principles of the Liberal Party. If it had not been for the Volunteer Force and the unwholesome feeling it had created, he did not think the Government would have had much difficulty in keeping down public opinion on the Eastern Question. He should take every opportunity of protesting against the Volunteer Force.

SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT

said, the right hon. Gentleman had stated that after 15 years' service they would receive 10s. per day, if compulsorily retired; but he (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) wished to know what a man who voluntarily retired after 15 years' service would get?

MR. CHILDERS

There is no change in the present scale for ordinary retirement. For compulsory retirement 2s. a-day has been added at the top of the scale.

SIR WILFRID LAWSON

said, he was much pleased to hear some observations which had been just made. He saw, on looking at the Votes, that they had 315,000 troops for Home and Colonial service. If they could not carry on all the wars they wished to wage with these, it was time they gave up fighting.

MR. CHILDERS

Our Army, if maintained in an efficient state, will do more to maintain peace than if so reduced as to provoke attack.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 131; Noes 16: Majority 115.—(Div. List, No. 353.)

(7.) £218,800, Army Reserve.

COLONEL ALEXANDER

wished to know what provision had been made for drilling and training the Army re-serve. He knew the rule was that they should be called out for 12 days each year; but, as a matter of fact, except when they were permanently called out in 1878, calls had only been made upon them in rare instances, and even then only a few at a time had been called up at Aldershot and other places. It would be better to call them up twice during their entire Reserve Service for 28 days each time, instead of 12 days annually. It was when a man had got half-way through each period of non-activity in the Service that he became rusty; therefore, instead of only calling the men up for 12 days annually, it would be better to call them up for two periods of 28 days each. There was one other point to which he wished to call attention. He had seen some of the Reserve in his own district, and they had struck him as being men who would be by no means fit for active military service if called upon. It did not seem to him that sufficient precautions were taken to see that the men were thoroughly fit if called upon for active service. He wished to ask whether, in the case of the men who enlisted to pass into the Reserve after three years with the Colours, and who, failing to obtain employment in civil life, wished to rejoin their regi- ments, the right hon. Gentleman could not, under any circumstances, allow them to do so? He had seen a letter from General Luard, commanding the Royal Canadian Militia, who stated that when he was employed at Manchester he found many cases of men who had been passed, after three years' service with the Colours, into the First Class Reserve, and who subsequently came to him to be re-admitted into their old regiments, but had to be refused and sent away. The consequence was that many of them re-enlisted under other names.

MR. CHILDERS

I am not prepared at this moment to say whether a change in the practice of not annually calling out the Reserve for drill is desirable. It is certain that the more you impose obligations on the men, the more unpopular the Service will become. We require o be very cautious in this matter of calling out the Reserve. Some weight is, no doubt, to be attached to the point contained in the letter the hon. and gallant Member has quoted. I can well imagine that some of the men have a difficulty in finding employment; and it is a fact that a few—but, probably, very few—have come back again into the Army.

Vote agreed to.

(8.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £444,800 (including a Supplementary Sum of £40,000), be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Commissariat, Transport, and Ordnance Store Establishments, Wages, &c. which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1882.

MR. CHILDERS

I think, perhaps, hon. Members will allow me to make a brief statement on this Vote. This is the first Vote we have taken to-night in which we have incorporated a portion of the Supplementary Estimate for the War in South Africa, and I ought to explain why that Estimate is necessary. The original Estimate this year was framed in January and laid before Parliament, I think, on the very day the news of the first action was received and a request by Sir George Colley for more troops. In moving the Estimates I explained that beyond the amount incorporated in the General Estimate for the War in South Africa, and which was shown separately in each, item, later in the Session there would have to be a Supplementary Esti- mate, as the original Votes only provided for the troops arranged to be sent out to the end of January. That we have done now. I may say, as to the framework of the Estimate, that it assumes this—that the present force in South Africa will be retained until the end of the three months allowed for the ratification of the Treaty—that is to say, at the end of October. After that the force will be reduced to about half, and we provide for this during what remains of the present year, 1881. If in the remaining three months of the present financial year—that is to say, up to March, 1882, there should be any necessity to make an addition to the normal force in South Africa—that is to say, if all the excess on the normal force is not withdrawn at Christmas, we shall have to ask for a Supplemental Vote next Session.

COLONEL DAWNAY

wished to call attention to the condition of the troops serving at the Gold Coast, the most unhealthy climate in the world. The normal unhealthiness of the place rendered it necessary that the greatest precautions should be taken to put the towns in as good a sanitary state as possible. The sickness amongst the British troops, which had been extremely great this year, was owing to the severity of the summer and the defective sanitary state of the Native towns. He would urge the right hon. Gentleman to consider the desirability of putting the Fanti towns in the neighbourhood of Cape Coast Castle under proper sanitary regulations, and of compelling the Native populations to keep the towns clean and get rid of the horrible cesspools and open drains which existed there. There were several healthy stations in the interior within a few miles of Cape Coast Castle, and to these places our troops should be sent, if, indeed, it was deemed necessary to keep any British troops in the country at all. We could have our West Indian regiments quartered at Sierra Leone; and these, with the Native Houssa Police, officered by Englishmen, would be quite sufficient to protect the settlement.

MR. CHILDERS

I entirely sympathize with the object of the hon. and gallant Gentleman; but I would point out that the state of things at the Gold Coast recently was quite exceptional. A large additional body of troops were sent there. The mortality of the small force at Cape Coast Castle, I am informed, is not unusually great, and the place is not in a worse sanitary condition than might be expected. I do not think it is worse than Sierra Leone, or other places in that part of the world. The exceptional state of things I have referred to was the necessity of taking very prompt defensive measures to meet the action which was expected on the part of the King of Ashantee. We sent off the troops in great haste, and it was very well that we did so, because their arrival undoubtedly prevented the outbreak of hostilities. We sent the troops in such a hurry that there was no time to communicate with Cape Coast Castle before they arrived, so as to enable the authorities to take measures for putting the place in a better sanitary condition. The troops suffered severely in consequence. Ordinarily, the men are not quartered in the Native towns, and the accommodation provided for them is not more unhealthy than is usual in these bad climates. On the general question, I may say it is not in my power to give orders for the improvement of these Colonial stations. The matter rests with the Colonial Office; and as to the hon. and gallant Member's suggestion that we should withdraw British troops altogether from Cape Coast Castle, that is a thing I should be loth to do without the distinct approval of the Colonial Office. Up to the present time, I have been advised by the Colonial Office that it would not be proper to leave the Cape Coast Castle solely protected by the Houssa police without Her Majesty's troops. We, therefore, must keep a small force there.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

said, he wished to draw the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to some complaints that were made by the Assistant Commissary General of the Ordnance Stores. Two years ago the Secretary of State for War had said that the Ordnance Store officers should be placed in the same position as other officers. They believed they suffered under a disadvantage from the fact that while there was at headquarters one Commissary General, they had there no permanent representation. A very decided opinion had been expressed by them as to the importance of having permanent representation at head-quarters, having regard to the vast number of details which came under their notice. That was the first point The second was that the Ordnance Store officers were not placed in a fair position with regard to pay as compared with the Commissariat officers. The wording of the Warrant relating to them was almost the same as that of the Warrant which regulated the pay of Commissariat officers; but, as a matter of fact, the operation of the two Warrants was very different. Almost every Assistant Commissariat officer of 25 years' service could draw 30s. a-day; but he believed there was no single assistant officer in the Store Department who could draw more than 24s. a-day. Most of the assistant officers of the former department could, if they thought fit, retire on 20s. a-day. The third grievance related to the titular rank of the Ordnance Store officers. It was a fact that in consequence of the regulation that officers of the Army who were appointed to the store branch should retain their military titles, many seniors in that Department would be styled "Mr.," while their juniors would be described as "Captain." Although some hon. Members might be disposed to laugh at the importance attached to that distinction, it undoubtedly constituted a great anomaly, and had given rise, as he understood, to a good deal of heart-burning. Such were the three points which he knew had led to much dissatisfaction in the store branch; and he would suggest that a very slight alteration in the Warrant of 1880 relating to officers in that branch would fulfil the promises which those gentlemen thought they were warranted in understanding that the noble Lord on the Front Opposition Benches gave them two years ago.

LORD EUSTACE CECIL

admitted that he had stated, when the last Government were in Office, that they were prepared to put the officers of the Store Department and the Commissariat Department on an equal footing. He understood the three points raised by the hon. Member for Queen's County to be—first, that there were no Ordnance Store officers at head-quarters; secondly, that they received less pay, as compared with the officers of the Commissariat Department; and, thirdly, that a grievance existed amongst them with regard to titular rank. All these questions were attentively gone into at the time referred to by the hon. Member. As regarded titular rank, he believed civilian officers in the Commissariat Department still held the title of "Mr.;" and, consequently, in that respect, there was no difference between the two branches. It was an understood thing that the Army officers who came into these Departments should retain their military rank; and, of course, having been competent officers, it would have been very hard to take that rank away from them. On the other hand, he thought it would be impossible for any Government to give military titles where they did not already exist. He did not think there was ever any intention to give Army titular rank to the officers of the Commissariat or Ordnance Store Departments who did not already possess them—that was to say, to those who had not gained it in the Army. With regard to the Commissary General at head-quarters, no doubt hon. Members would know that the Commissary General was under the Commander-in-Chief. The number of officers of the Commissariat Department was larger by 60 or 70 than that of the Ordnance Store Department, and it was believed that the Assistant Commissary General would be able to represent both Departments. He certainly had said that this matter should be considered, and that, if it were possible, a gentleman of the Ordnance Store Department should be appointed. Then, as regarded difference of pay, he had not been able to discover that there was any difference between the two Departments in respect of pay. Such differences, however, might exist, and he had promised to look into the question to see what could be done. It was perfectly true that he had made that statement; but it was, of course, not binding on his successors in Office, who would answer for themselves; and he had no doubt whatever that the right hon. Gentleman opposite would have good reasons for what he had done, and for what he might do in future, with regard to this Department of the Public Service.

MR. CHILDERS

said, since the present Government had been in Office the question to which the hon. Member for Queen's County had drawn attention had not come before him in any shape. The hon. Member would understand that there were some extremely difficult questions in connection with the subject he had referred to. For his own part, he had every wish to see the Ordnance Store Department treated fairly.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

said, he hoped that something like an equality of pay would be established. As a matter of fact, the officers belonging to the Store Department had had very much longer service, and yet they received a lower average rate of pay than the officers of the Commissariat Branch.

MR. LABOUCHERE

said, he observed on page 40 a charge of £5,202 for police employed under the Contagious Diseases Prevention Acts. There was a good deal of difference of opinion with regard to the operation of those Acts. He should not enter into any detail, because the subject was not an agreeable one; but, no doubt, while there were arguments which might be used in their favour, a considerable number of persons were opposed to them, some on the ground of inefficiency, others on the ground of immorality, while others believed that they could not be carried out without doing wrong to respectable persons. Under these circumstances, he did not think there was sufficient general assent in their favour to justify public money being spent upon them. He should, therefore, move that the Vote be reduced by the sum of £5,202.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £439,698 (including a Supplementary Sum of £40,000), be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Commissariat, Transport, and Ordnance Store Establishments, Wages, &c. which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1882."—(Mr. Labouchere.)

MR. T. P. O'CONNOR

said, he regretted that the hon. Member for Northampton had brought forward this Motion on the present occasion, because, although his present opinion was in favour of it, he should have liked a little further time for consideration. As it was, however, he should have no choice but to vote with the hon. Member. With regard to the quartermasters in the Store Department, he understood that considerable dissatisfaction existed amongst those officers on account of the loss or deterioration of social position, which they believed they sustained in connection with the alteration of their titular rank. If the right hon. Gentleman would say a word or two on the question, it might, perhaps, remove a good deal of the feeling which existed amongst these gentlemen in consequence of their being treated with a great want of consideration by the military authorities.

SIR HENRY HOLLAND

said, he was aware of the difference of opinion which existed on the subject of the Contagious Diseases Acts; but he trusted that the hon. Member for Northampton would not press his Motion to a division on this occasion. He reminded the Committee that a Committee, of which he himself had been a Member, was sitting for the purpose of considering these Acts; and until that Committee had reported, it was certainly necessary that police should be employed to carry the Acts into operation.

MR. CHILDERS

said, he would venture to add his request to that of the hon. Baronet opposite, that the hon. Member for Northampton would not think it necessary to call upon the Committee to proceed to a division upon his Motion. He made this appeal in the interest of those persons who were opposed to the Acts, because a great many hon. Members would vote for the Estimate as requisite so long as the law was in operation, although they did not agree that the present state of the law was satisfactory. He could speak for several Gentlemen who were not satisfied with the present condition of things, who could not but vote the necessary expenditure for carrying out the law, but who, if the question were whether the law should be changed or not, would certainly vote against its continuance.

An hon. MEMBER said, he also hoped that the Motion would not be pressed. He believed the Acts in question were both useful and moral in their tendency. Anyone who had heard the evidence given before the Committee upstairs must have been impressed with the benefit which had been derived from their operation in garrison towns.

MR. LABOUCHERE

said, he regretted he was unable to yield to the appeals made to him to withdraw his Motion. But he felt very strongly upon this subject, as did also his constituents. No Report of any Committee, nor even the opinion of his constituents, would ever convince him that an error had not been committed in regard to these Acts.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 13; Noes 80: Majority 67.—(Div. List, No. 354.)

Original Question put, and agreed to.

(9.) £780,000, Clothing Establishments, Services, and Supplies.

LORD EUSTACE CECIL

wished to urge the Secretary of State for War to go very thoroughly into the prices at the clothing establishments, especially in regard to the cloth for tunics and caps and badges. These might be small things, but they involved a large sum of money. There was a great deal of waste; and he also would suggest that a large amount of the clothing made elsewhere might be made at these establishments.

MR. CHILDERS

said, he quite agreed that these small things were important, and promised to consider the matter.

SIR HENRY HOLLAND

said, there was a large reduction in the amount of material sold to contractors; and he wished to know if any substantial change was to be made in the Clothing Department?

MR. CHILDERS

said, that this was only a matter of account, and that there was really no change.

SIR HENRY FLETCHER

said, the new Regulation required soldiers to surrender their uniform on retiring from the Army, and to purchase new clothing. Would any allowance be made on that account? There was, he added, great dissatisfaction among the men.

MR. CHILDERS

said, he did not think there was anything like general dissatisfaction upon this matter, and that the change was made on the recommendation of the whole body of commanding officers.

COLONEL ALEXANDER

said, the commanding officers had advised that the men's uniforms should be taken away on their leaving, for many men had gone about begging in their uni forms, and so disgraced the Service.

Vote agreed to.

(10.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £1,290,000 (including a Supplementary Sum of £120,000), be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for the Supply, Manufacture, and Repair of Warlike and other Stores (including Establishments of Manufacturing Departments), which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1882.

LORD EUSTACE CECIL

desired to know in what position the question of breech-loading guns stood; what the Committee on that subject were doing; whether they had hit upon a gun that would suit the Naval Service; and whether they proposed any change in the breech-loading guns for land service? He also wished to know if there was any disposition to consider magazine guns as any part of our armed service; and why there was so large an increase for gunpowder? Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would explain the decrease for materials and metal; and why there was an increase of £17,400 in regard to machinery?

MAJOR-GENERAL FEILDEN

moved that Progress be reported.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Major-General Feilden.)

MR. CHILDERS

said, he hoped the Committee would not report Progress at a quarter before 2, considering what had still to be done in the few remaining days of the Session. There was no contentious matter in the remainder of this Vote, and he hoped the Committee would proceed.

Question put, and negatived.

MR. CHILDERS

said, in reply to the noble Lord the Member for West Essex (Lord Eustace Cecil), that the question of breech-loading guns would come up on the Navy Estimates, and he should take part in that discussion. Undoubtedly, the use of prismatic powder did necessitate longer guns and larger chambers. Both those considerations pointed to the advantage of breech-loading guns over muzzle-loading guns, especially when the guns were in a confined position, and when a larger chamber was required for the powder than for the projectile. Guns which were not in a confined position, or in turrets—muzzle-loading guns—could be loaded, so far as their length was concerned, as well as breech-loaders; but the larger chamber was coming more and more into use, and that tended more and more to the use of the breech-loader; and he did not doubt that there would be a large increase in those guns, especially for service at sea. The Committee were making most careful experiments, and he had not hurried their operations. The question of magazine guns was not yet settled; but he had seen them all, and he was satisfied they had a great many faults. As to the items of the Vote, there had been a saving on metal due to the requirements having been less this year, and the stock sufficient for all that was wanted. The increase in gunpowder was owing to increased demands, and to the stock having become low.

MAJOR-GENERAL BURNABY

said, he believed that the gun-spikes carried by the pioneers in Infantry regiments would not effectually spike any modern gun; moreover, the number carried was too few.

MR. CHILDERS

thanked the hon. and gallant Member for drawing attention to the matter.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT

moved to report Progress. He was willing, if necessary, to sit there; but he thought it too much to put forward, at 10 minutes past 2, all these Estimates, and to force them down the throats of hon. Members. He protested against the practice.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Sir Walter B. Barttelot.)

MR. CHILDERS

said, he had no intention to force these Votes against the wish of any considerable number of Members, and he would agree to take the remaining Votes to-morrow.

Motion agreed, to.

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.

Committee to sit again To-morrow.