§ SIR ALEXANDER GORDONasked the Secretary of State for War, If he will state the reason why, in the regulation which he has submitted for adoption by the House of Commons relating to compulsory retirement in the Army, he proposes to make the periods of non-employment which are to necessitate compulsory retirement, five years for General and Field Officers, and three years for Majors; while in a corresponding regulation for the Navy the periods of non-employment which necessitate compulsory retirement are, ten years for Flag Officers, seven years for Captains, and five years for Commanders and Lieutenants?
§ MR. CHILDERSIn reply to my hon. and gallant Friend, I may say that there are several reasons why the rules for retirement from the Army and Navy in the upper ranks should not be identical, whether in respect of age, rate of pay, or non-employment; but I could not well state these in the compass of an answer to a Question. As to non-employment, I may say that the rule adopted for flag officers in the Navy in 1870 was an experiment, the result of 1824 which, in my opinion, justifies a shorter term now for generals in the Army.