§ (9.) £311,000, Medical Establishments.
SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, in the first place, it would be well if he were to ask the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War (the Marquess of Hartington), what course he meant to take with regard to the Report of the Medical Committee which sat to inquire into the various medical questions which arose out of the Egyptian War? He was desirous that the Committee should receive the assurance that no great change would be made during the Recess, or before Parliament had had an opportunity of considering the Report in question. At present, in the absence of such an assurance, there were one or two matters connected with the Medical Establishment generally in the Army, which he wished to bring under the notice of the noble Marquess. As a matter of fact, this was the only opportunity he and his hon. Friends, who were greatly interested in the Medical Services of the Army, had had, since the Egyptian Campaign, of calling the attention of Parliament to those Services as carried out during that campaign. In the Departmental Committee, presided over by Lord Morley, there was a great difference of opinion as to the Medical Services 1224 during the Egyptian Campaign; but there was generally a strong feeling that the present medical systemin the Army was not altogether satisfactory. Up till a few years ago, there was a regimental system which, in his opinion, and he served under it, was thoroughly satisfactory. Now, however, the regimental system had been abolished, He had the authority of several officers holding high positions, and who gave evidence before Lord Morley's Committee, for saying it was most desirable that a regimental system for the Medical Service or, at any rate, a semi-regimental system should be established. With the permission of the Committee, he would allude to one or two points in the evidence given before Lord Morley's Committee. Major General Hawley, and the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Berkshire (Colonel Sir Robert Loyd-Lindsay), who was not now present, owing to ill-health, dissented from the existing system. The regimental system was one which the officers in the Army, from the Field Marshal Commanding-in-Chief downwards, were unanimously in favour of continuing. They had also the evidence of His Royal Highness the Duke of Connaught, who commanded the Brigade of Guards in the late campaign, and they had the opinion of Lord Wolseley, who was General Officer commanding the troops in Egypt, all in the same direction. Lord Wolseley, in Answer 6,307, said—
According to the old system, a man went to his own regimental officer, and the medical officer of the regiment, having a direct interest in his regiment, took care he did not have malingering in the hospital under his command.Under the present system, there was great difficulty in ascertaining whether there was any malingering amongst the men of a regiment. He (Sir Henry Fletcher) had had experience of the old Line regiments, and he well remembered that the regimental doctor was the best friend, not only to the officers, but also to the men. He did not intend to propose that the old system should be adopted, of two regimental doctors in each regiment; but he did wish to propose that a system should be established, in accordance with the evidence which had been given before Lord Morley's Committee by His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, the Duke of Connaught, 1225 Lord Wolseley, General Lysons, who, he regretted to say, had just retired from active service, and other eminent officers. All those officers were in favour of a medical officer being attached for a certain number of years to each regiment in Her Majesty's Service A largo mass of evidence was given by every description of officer and non-commissioned officer, and by privates; but if hon. Members would only take the trouble to wade through it, they would be amply repaid by the knowledge they would gain. It was given in evidence that one battalion of the Rifle Brigade was quartered for 14 months at the Curragh Camp; and, during that time, 13 medical officers were attached to the regiment. Under such circumstances, how could any non-commissioned officer or private have any confidence in the medical officer, or how could the medical officer have any feeling towards the men? The old regimental system was an expensive one, and, no doubt, he would be told by the noble Marquess, or by one of the hon. Gentlemen associated with the noble Marquess at the War Office, that it would be impossible to revert to the old system on account of the expense. He (Sir Henry Fletcher) was aware that the old system cost the country something like £22,000 a-year, and he did not suppose the Committee would sanction such an expenditure for the sake of returning to the regimental system. He did, however, earnestly trust that some means would be taken to revert to a semi-regimental system, and that, in accordance with the evidence given before Lord Morley's Committee, at least one regimental officer would be appointed to each regiment in Her Majesty's Service for a period of not less than five years. The system prevailing amongst the Household troops was entirely different to that existing in the Line battalions. In the Household troops, the regimental system had, to a certain extent, existed up to the present moment, although certain changes had been made during the past few years. Formerly, the medical officers were attached to Her Majesty's Household troops for a certain number of years; in fact, they held the office until they were superannuated, either by age or promotion; and, at the present moment, there were two medical officers attached to each regiment of the House-hold 1226 troops. One of the Members of Lord Morley's Committee, Sir John M'Cormack, had made an addition to his remarks in the Report, and that addition was to the effect that the medical officers of the Household troops should be placed on the same footing as the medical officers of other regiments; that there should be one general Staff in London for the Household troops—that, in fact—for it amounted to nothing else—the present good feeling existing between the medical officers and the troops should be done away with. He (Sir Henry Fletcher) begged to assure the Committee that the system now prevailing in the Household regiments had worked well; and he trusted the noble Marquess at the head of the War Office would not do anything to carry out the suggestion of Sir John M'Cormack, before an opportunity had been afforded of thoroughly satisfying not only Parliament, but the country generally, that the existing arrangements were perfectly satisfactory. He knew it was said that the medical officers in the Guards were not brought into contact with the other medical officers throughout the Service; but the medical officers of Her Majesty's Household troops were quite satisfied with the existing arrangements. They had certainly not the means of obtaining that rapid promotion which others in the Medical Department had; but he believed he was right in saying there had not been any complaint whatever made by the medical officers in the Guards on that account. It might also be urged that there was a difficulty with regard to detachments of the Household troops being sent away from London; but, for years and years past, detachments of the Household troops had been sent away from London, and there had been no difficulty at all in carrying out the medical arrangements connected with the regiments forming the detachments. There was another matter he ought to bring prominently before the Committee, a matter with regard to which he gave a Notice some few weeks ago. Up to within a short time, the Foot Guards had their own free hospitals; but, owing to arrangements made by the War Office, those free hospitals had been taken away from the three regiments. The hospitals were kept up by a private fund, collected and managed by the officers, and he gave 1227 Notice the other day, that, if something or other was not settled in regard to those hospitals, he should feel obliged to bring the matter before the Committee. Up to yesterday nothing had been settled. Both for the sake of the officers of the Foot Guards, and also for the sake of the War Office authorities, it was very desirable the question should be settled. The hospital belonging to the Grenadier Guards was freehold property, and its value was something like £16,000. The hospitals of the Coldstreams and Scots Guards were leasehold. There was, however, a considerable money value attached to them. The hospitals had been taken away from the commanding officers commanding the Guards, and handed over to the Medical Department, they were supplied by orderlies of the Army Hospital Corps, instead of by orderlies connected with the Brigade of Guards. The question was exciting some curiosity, and it was as well that it should at once be set at rest, one way or the other. Reverting to the medical arrangements during the Egyptian Campaign, he wished to point out that Lord Wolseley had said, when he gave his evidence before Lord Morley's Committee, that he did not know it was the fact that the hospital which he supposed was the base hospital at Ismailia was the base hospital. They had it in evidence that the field hospitals in Egypt were not up to the mark at the commencement of the campaign. They also had it in evidence that it was most desirable that in future campaigns all field hospitals and the base hospital should be dieting hospitals. It was given in evidence that wounded cases were sent down from Kassassin and the various minor engagements which took place previous to Tel-el-Kebir, and that, when they arrived at Ismailia, no matter what time of the night it might be, they were not able to obtain any refreshment. The answer they received was—"You have come from the front; you were rationed this morning; you arrive here at 10 o'clock at night, and you ought to have brought your rations with you." Could it be expected that a wounded or sick soldier, when about to cross the desert of Egypt to the hospital, 22 miles away, should think of asking for rations to take with him? It was very plain also, that the men who were sent from the 1228 front did not receive the attention which ought to have been paid them. He did not blame the medical officers, and he would not make a charge against the medical officers at the base hospital at Ismailia. The red-tapeism of the War Office was responsible for what happened in Egypt. The medical officers were supposed to ask for everything they wanted from the Commissariat, and the Commissariat maintained that the medical officers did not ask for what they wanted. This brought them face to face with the simple question—Was the medical officer to be in sole charge of the hospital, which Lord Wolseley, in his evidence, said he was, or was he, whenever he required anything, to go through an absurd system of red-tapeism to the detriment, probably, of an exhausted man lying in hospital? There was one other matter he would ask the noble Marquess and the hon. and gallant Gentleman beside him to inquire into. Under the present system, a medical officer was the responsible head in the hospital. It was quite right he should be the responsible being, with regard to the tending and nursing and doctoring of the sick; but he (Sir Henry Fletcher) would suggest—and he did so in consequence of the evidence given before the Committee—that a military commandant should have charge of the discipline of the Army Hospital Corps. A medical officer had quite enough to do to look after the sick and wounded; indeed, Sir John Hanbury himself said—It was perfectly impossible for me to carry-out all the clerical duties which were supposed to be carried out by me under the existing arrangements.Furthermore, the conditions of the Army Hospital Corps was not altogether satisfactory. The corps was not recruited from the right sources. The men were picked up in the streets of London. Such was not formerly the case, because the corps was made up of men picked out of the ranks of the Army. He submitted that the men forming the hospital corps should, at least, have an idea of plain nursing; in fact, previous to joining the corps they should be taught the duties of nurses and of trained orderlies. Arrangements should also be made whereby the men should know something of cookery; for it was given in evidence, that the cooking 1229 arrangements in the Medical Department were anything but satisfactory. Lord Wolseley gave it in evidence, that he went to Cairo three weeks after the troops had taken up their position there; and, in going to the hospital, he asked the principal medical officer what were the arrangements for cooking. The medical officer showed him some trenches in the garden. Lord Wolseley said—"Are these the only arrangements you have made?" And the doctor said they were. "But have not the men in hospital had a baked pudding yet?" asked Lord Wolseley. The medical officer replied—"Oh, no; we have just beef or mutton, or whatever comes." As a matter of fact, the men in hospital during the Egyptian Campaign had no comforts. He trusted that investigation might be made into the Army Hospital Corps, and that the arrangements for training the men might be greatly improved; for the proper tending of the sick and wounded in any campaign was most essential.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he did not rise for the purpose of following the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Sir Henry Fletcher) into all the observations he had made upon the evidence given before Lord Morley's Committee; but, if necessary, he would do so by-and-bye. It might, however, save time if he were to answer at once the first question which the hon. and gallant Gentleman put to him. The hon. and gallant Member asked what course the Government proposed to take with regard to the recommendations of Lord Morley's Committee? He (the Marquess of Hartington) stated, the other day, in answer to the hon. Member for the North Riding (Mr. Guy Dawnay), that Lord Morley's Committee had made a variety of important recommendations upon a large number of subjects. As soon as possible after the Recess, it was proposed that those recommendations should be considered as to what extent they should be adopted. He could not pledge himself further, because the responsibility must ultimately rest with the Government, and not with the House of Commons. At the same time, considering that the House had I not had an opportunity this Session of discussing the recommendations of the Committee, it was right that he should undertake that no important changes 1230 should be made during the Recess. They would not come into operation before the House had had an opportunity of discussing them.
COLONEL MILNE-HOMEsaid, he could not but express regret that the discussion on this, one of the most important Votes in the Army Estimates, should have been postponed until half-past 8 o'clock on a Saturday evening, on the 18th of August. Considering the experience he had had in Egypt recently, he should have been glad to have taken that opportunity of entering into the various particulars dealt with in the Report of the Committee, which was a very bulky one. He, however, would refrain from doing so, chiefly in consequence of the statement which had just been made by the noble Marquess. Not only was it the evident desire of the Government, but the "evident sense" of the House—as the emptiness of the Benches showed—that no discussion should take place on this occasion; therefore, he should defer what little he had to say until the discussion took place on the Motion of the hon. Member to which the noble Marquess had just now alluded. He certainly begged to tender to the noble Marquess his thanks, on behalf of the Household Cavalry, for the statement he had just now made. They had been dreading, as the result of the recommendations of the Committee, that their system would be assimilated to that of the Regular Army. Their medical system, he need not tell the noble Lord, was purely regimental—it was more regimental than that of the Brigade of Guards—and it worked so far as they, the regimental officers, thought, efficiently—and satisfactorily. He was therefore—without expressing any opinion at this moment as to the advisability of assimilating the Household Cavalry to the Line, or the Line to the Household Cavalry—glad that no steps were to be taken to interfere with their Medical Service before Parliament met again.
MR. ACLANDsaid, he was sorry to take up the time of the Committee; but there were two or three points which he had special reasons to desire an explanation of. One was, whether it was intended to continue, and, if so, on what ground, the present arrangement, by which—as was stated in The Times, on Friday, the 7th of August, when prizes 1231 were distributed at Netley to the successful surgeons who went up for the purpose of gaining commissions in the Army Medical Department—the candidates would not have the work which they did at Netley counted with reference to their place in the examination; whereas those who went up for the Indian examination did have the work counted? He was anxious to know whether that system was to be continued, and whether there was to be a distinction between the medical work for the Indian and that for the English Army? The other question he had to ask was, whether it was intended to continue the present system, by which the Commandant at Netley was a military instead of a medical officer? The hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire (Dr. Farquharson) had a Motion on the Paper to reduce the Vote by the amount of that officer's salary; but that hon. Member was not now present. Be (Mr. Acland) should like to know whether it was intended to continue that military officer at the head of the Netley Establishment, or not? He should like to know, further, whether, next Session, it would be possible for them to have some development of the scheme for training men for the Army Hospital Corps; and whether it would not be possible to give them some kind of indoor duty, so that the men would not regard the ward duty as they did now—namely, with aversion, and as a function which they would do all in their power to escape?
§ COLONEL ALEXANDERsaid, he considered that the time at which that Vote was brought on was singularly inconvenient and inopportune. The whole question of hospital management and nursing in the field was of such vast importance relatively, as bearing on the health and efficiency of the troops, that it ought not to be relegated to that late period of the Session, or submitted to the criticism of a weary and jaded House. He felt that it would be idle and unprofitable for him to detain the Committee at that hour with any lengthened reiteration of the accusations bandied about between the officers of the Army Medical Department on the one hand, and the Combatant Authorities on the other, with reference to the medical conduct of the Campaign in Egypt. Like all other human institutions, 1232 no doubt, the Army Medical Department sometimes fell into error; and, no doubt, some of its officers might not always have exhibited the zeal which characterized the Service as a whole. However that might be; of the general body he might say that it had highly merited the commendation bestowed upon it by Lord Wolesley in those now familiar terse words—
The Army Medical Department, under Surgeon General Hanbury, C.B., did all they possibly could have done for the care and comfort of the sick and wounded.That put the case, so far as regarded the Medical Department of the Army in Egypt, in a nutshell. It was not necessary to go beyond the words of that despatch of Lord Wolesley in that matter. As to the system, the Report of Lord Morley's Committee certainly disclosed some grievous shortcomings, which had been brought prominently before the notice of Lord Wolesley. Lord Wolesley, then Sir Garnet, was a man in authority, and would naturally do all in his power to bring about, as far as possible, an improvement. He would, therefore, require all information bearing on the efficiency of this branch of the Service to be submitted to him. One of the first things that struck one in perusing the Report was the faulty organization of the Army Hospital Corps, to which the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Acland) had just now referred. That corps was raised some seven or eight years ago; but the Service, in this respect, had not yet been placed on a proper footing. At the time of the outbreak of the campaign in Egypt, the corps was below its full strength, and if hostilities had continued, it would have been found necessary to send out an additional Bearer Company, which it would be necessary to select from the Militia and the Militia Reserve—that was to say, of entirely untrained men, so far as regarded hospital management. Even during the short campaign in Egypt, 90 men of the Field Hospital Corps sent to the seat of war consisted of volunteers from the First Class Army Reserve, and their places at home were supplied by 158 men also belonging to the Reserve. Of these latter, the Report said that they were on the whole as useful as untrained men could possibly be, which was certainly not saying much. Of the 90 men belonging to the First Class 1233 Army Reserve, who were sent to the seat of war, some behaved in a most disgraceful manner. They were indeed worse than useless. It was bad enough when, in the Army, they found themselves saddled with inefficient men; but it was ten times worse, of course, when those inefficient men turned out bad characters into the bargain. There had been little or no time to examine the papers of the men. What was wanted for the Army Hospital Corps was, that it should be extended so as to give it a sufficiently large Army Reserve of its own, and, as the hon. and gallant Member for Horsham (Sir Henry Fletcher) had said, it would be well for that branch of the Service were it more largely recruited from the ranks than was at present the case. The evidence given before the Committee was to the effect that old soldiers were among the most useful and efficient nurses. And then, as to the drill of the Army Hospital Corps, with all due respect to the opinion of Lord Wolseley, he (Colonel Alexander) could not agree with him as to the time which would suffice for drilling a civilian. He did not believe that a week's drill was sufficient. He maintained that the men required a certain amount of company drill. Moreover, they required to be trained as bearers, and it was necessary that they should have a certain amount of club drill in order to strengthen their muscles and develop their chests. Furthermore, it was necessary that all members of the Army Hospital Corps should know how to cook; and not only to cook for men in health, but, what was more difficult than that, to cook for invalids. It was given in evidence, on this point, that, at present, there was no training in cooking for the men, and that they therefore had to pick up their knowledge of cooking as best they could. The British soldier, in this respect, was not like a French soldier, a born cook and, consequently, the cooking the English soldier would pick up would not be likely to be of a very useful character. Miss Lloyd, one of the female nurses, had given evidence distinctly to the effect that the cooking in the British Army hospitals was extremely bad The Committee—those who had studied the Blue Book—would not perhaps be surprised to hear that the matter to which least attention was paid in the 1234 Army Hospital Corps was that of nursing; indeed, that it was positively discouraged. It was discouraged in this way. In addition to their daily pay all the men in the Army Hospital Corps received what was called "departmental pay," and the amount of that which was allotted to men who volunteered as orderlies or nurses was less than that given to men who officiated as cooks or clerks, so that there was positively no inducement whatever for men to acquire a knowledge of the important duty of nursing, but rather the reverse. That appeared to him a very grave fault in our system, particularly as it was given in evidence by the female nurses, that it was impossible to dispense altogether with the services of men as orderlies or nurses. It was also said that many patients in minor cases preferred to be nursed by men rather than women, although, no doubt, in the; graver cases it was important that women should be employed. He was glad that the Committee recommended; that the Army Hospital Corps should be allowed the opportunity of practising with war equipments during the time of peace; and it was to be hoped that the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Hartington) would take into consideration the desirability of, at any rate, adopting this recommendation of the Committee. Were it not for the admissions of the Army Medical Department officials, it would be hardly credible that the field hospital was never mobilized by any chance in time of peace, and that the medical officers had thus no opportunity whatever of learning how to pack and unpack, and of seeing how a field hospital was worked in time of war. There was one recommendation which he was glad to hear, from the declaration of the noble Marquess, he was not prepared to carry out at present—namely, the assimilation of the Medical Service of the Guards to that of the rest of the Army. As everyone knew, the present system of the Army was departmental, and it had been shown that the departmental system had entirely broken down. Various General and Field officers, including, as the hon. and gallant Member for Horsham (Sir Henry Fletcher) had said, Lord Wolseley and Sir Daniel Lysons, had all, with one accord, condemned the present or departmental system. Lord Wolseley, 1235 especially, told the Committee that, under the old regimental system, every medical officer knew his men, and consequently had no malingerers in his hospital, and that one of the greatest difficulties with which they had to contend under the present departmental system was that of malingering. It was urged that the present departmental system should have a fair trial, and he (Colonel Alexander) had no objection whatever to that. Only let them wait to see whether it succeeded before they deprived the Guards of their present regimental system. One of the greatest objections to keeping up the regimental system in the Army had been the difficulty of keeping up the foreign roster; but that did not apply to the Guards, because they did not take their turn on foreign service with the rest of the Army. Some of the medical officers of the Guards, who were examined before the Committee, said they desired to see the medical officers in the Guards doing duty at station hospitals. That would get rid of the difficulty which was stated to exist through their, at present, having no large practice. If they did duty at station hospitals, that difficulty would at once disappear. That was the system adopted in the German Army. A Staff officer of the German Army had given evidence before the Committee, and had pointed out that, in the German Army, the system was entirely regimental and not departmental, and that the medical officers of the German Army were regimental medical officers who did duty in the station hospitals. He was glad the noble Marquess had given an assurance that, for the present, at any rate, he would not alter the system which, hitherto, had been found to work so well in the Guards.
§ DR. LYONSsaid, that, at that hour, it would be a mistake to attempt to go more than briefly into the subjects mentioned in the Blue Book. Next year they would have a better opportunity of going into the matter. A good deal of dissatisfaction had been created amongst the medical officers of the Army; but, without going into detail, he might say that the noble Marquess the Secretary of State (the Marquess of Hartington), on a former occasion, in a few handsome and generous words, had created a feeling of great satisfaction, by his recognition of the services of the Army Medical 1236 Department. As to the subject of nurses, that was one of a very important character. He (Dr. Lyons) was not so sure that a solution of the difficulty was not offered in the Blue Book—namely, that, in future campaigns, they must look for more assistance from persons of the other sex of a superior character. He was not, himself, a great believer in making men nurses. Though very humane and useful work, nursing was not, after all, a work in which men could win much distinction, or show that energy which might naturally be expected from them. Therefore, he thought it was rather in some judicious extension of the system of female nurses, or, at all events, female hospital attendants and subordinates, that the system could be improved. He did not think they would be able to arrive at a solution of the question, except in that direction, and he spoke with some experience on the matter. He would like to call the noble Marquess's attention to one other point. The noble Marquess had shown that he fully appreciated the fine feelings with which the Army Medical Service was actuated. In their struggles for proper recognition, he knew they had been influenced by feelings of the highest character. They were men of the highest scientific attainments; they devoted their lives, in all circumstances of great difficulty and danger, to the work of their profession—very often they had added to the special dangers they had to encounter in their own profession the dangers encountered by combatant officers, but without a chance of the distinctions of that branch. Medical officers were as much, or very nearly as much, exposed to risk from bullets as from disease. There was one point—he would only just briefly mention it—which touched them very deeply, and on which they had, over and over again, made representations to him and to the hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite; he meant that invidious distinction by which the children of medical officers were not eligible for Queen's cadet-ships. That was a distinction which put them in a position of great inferiority, and always caused heart-burning, and a feeling of great dissatisfaction amongst gentlemen who had served Her Majesty in all parts of the world, and had given their best energies to the Service, and who 1237 found, when their children grew up, that they were in an inferior position to the children of other officers. He (Dr. Lyons) was quite sure, from the generous spirit the noble Marquess had all through exhibited, that he would fully recognize the hardship in this case. The point was one which must come home to every one of them who had children—when it was known that they were put in a position of inferiority. He would ask the noble Marquess particularly to bear this point in mind; for he (Dr. Lyons) had no doubt it, along with some other matters, was quite capable of being adjusted. If it were adjusted, it would give the highest satisfaction to the Medical branch of the Service.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, the discussion of the Report of Lord Morley's Committee had better be postponed until the action the Government proposed to take upon it, was brought forward in the early part of next year. He would say just a word or two by way of briefly replying to hon. Gentlemen who had addressed the Committee. As to the departmental and regimental systems, he had carefully examined all the evidence in the Report on the subject, and though he did not deny that the regimental system was still preferred by military men, still he failed to see that there was anything in connection with the campaign in Egypt which, in the slightest degree, impugned the efficiency of the present system, or pointed to the desirability of returning to the regimental system. Several officers were examined, and expressed their preference for the old system; but none of the evidence which was given bore, in any degree, on the medical conduct of the campaign. It was shown, over and over again, that, during war, we could only have a regimental system to a very small extent. All serious cases had always to be brought to field hospitals. He failed to see, in any part of the Report, any proof that the present system had had an evil effect during the campaign in Egypt. It was acknowledged that there had been some shortcomings during the campaign, otherwise the Committee would not have been appointed. The object of the Committee had not been to investigate the conduct of particular individuals, but to ascertain how the organization and administration could 1238 be improved. The Committee would observe that a considerable portion of the recommendations of the Report was devoted to the question of improving the Army Hospital Corps. The hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for South Ayrshire (Colonel Alexander) had recommended the adoption of a Reserve. It was impossible, in times of peace, to keep idle a force of the Army Hospital Corps sufficient to deal with a great war; but he agreed that every effort should be made for increasing, as rapidly as possible, the Reserve of the corps. They could not, of course, have two corps in existence—one only to be called on in the event of war. Attention had been drawn to the medical conduct of the Egyptian Campaign. Well, it was only necessary to read the Report, in order to see what the result of the medical attendance was. They could not but be struck with the small proportion of deaths in comparison with the number of wounded, and the absence of cases of hospital diseases, such as blood-poisoning and injury to eyesight. That showed that, although there might have been some discomfort and inconvenience, and some want of care in certain details of the profession, still the main object—namely, the preservation of life and the cure of disease—was successfully carried out. He believed, in fact, there never was a campaign in which the medical part of the work had been more successfully carried out than it had been during the recent campaign in Egypt. If that was the fact—and the fact spoke for itself—it showed that there could not not have been any considerable want of care or knowledge on the part of the medical officers. A question had been asked by the hon. Member near him (Dr. Lyons) as to the exclusion of some medical officers—or, rather, their sons—from the privilege afforded to the sons of officers of the Army of becoming Queen's cadets. Whether that exclusion was right or wrong, he could assure the hon. Member that it had not been come to with the intention of placing the children of the non-combatant officers in a position of inferiority. The number of Queen's cadetships was limited, and it would be unfortunate if the number open to the sons of combatant officers were diminished. But that was not the only reason for the exclusion of the sons of medical officers. The object of the cadet-ships 1239 was that the sons of deserving combatant officers might be trained at Sandhurst to the profession their fathers had followed before them—that these officers might easily and naturally train up their sons to follow their profession. The same reasons did not hold good in the case of the medical officers—they could not be trained there to the profession of their fathers. They would have to attend a different Institution altogether to learn that profession. That was one of the reasons why it had been hitherto held that the medical officers had not the same claim for the Queen's cadetships that the combatant officers had. At any rate, there was no intention of inflicting any stigma on the medical officers.
SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, he should like to point out to the noble Marquess that there was evidence in the Blue Book against the departmental system. He had not eared to trouble the Committee with reading the evidence; but he should be willing to do so if it was desired.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he did not mean to say that there was no evidence to that effect in the Blue Book. What he had said was that the evidence in favour of the regimental system was not directly connected with the experience of the campaign. As to the head authority at Netley, no decision had yet been arrived at. The Committee had recommended that, in cases of large hospitals, there should be one responsible man in charge, who should be a medical officer. He (the Marquess of Hartington) thought that was the right principle to go upon; but he must say that great objection had been taken to that arrangement by some of the military authorities, and some difficulties had been pointed out. There were a great number of both officers and men employed in connection with these hospitals who did not belong to the Medical Department. There might be some difficulty in settling this question, and he could not actually say what the arrangement would be in the future, although he did not think a military commandant like the present would be appointed.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, he had heard the statement of the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Hartington) as to the Guards' hospital 1240 with some disappointment, because he (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) was anxious to hear the details of the arrangement which had been proposed. He was in hopes of hearing that the interests of the public, as distinct from the interests of the Brigade, would have been carefully safeguarded both by the Department and the Treasury. That, he was afraid, would not be the case in the present instance. The Committee might not be aware of it; but, as a matter of fact, in connection with the hospital of the Guards, there had existed for a great number of years one of the grossest scandals and one of the grossest jobs which had ever been perpetrated in the Public Service. There was a certain arrangement made in the Brigade of Guards many years ago—going back to the end of the last century—by which a reduction in the pay of the men provided for the hospital and recruiting services was brought about. As time went on, certain modifications were introduced into the system, until the time of the Crimean War, when Lord Panmure consented to a temporary arrangement, by which the Guards were to receive some thousands a-year to cover these two services, until further inquiry and definite arrangement could be made with regard to them. But that further inquiry never took place, and from the year 1853, he thought, until quite recently, the Brigade of. Guards was in receipt, through the Army Estimates, of a sum of over £13,000 a-year. This sum was handed over on the original understanding that the Guards were to provide for their hospital and recruiting services; but, as a matter of fact, they did not provide for either the one or the other. The hospital service was provided for by means of hospital stoppages, and certain other classes of incomes; and the recruiting service was entirely provided for, independent of the Stock Purse Fund, as it was called. It was true the Stock Purse Fund figures were mixed up with the recruiting and hospital figures; but, as a matter of fact, although the Brigade of Guards received this £13,000 a-year to cover the services he had mentioned, those services were practically paid for out of public money, obtained in an indirect manner. It was claimed all through this time by the Guards that these hospitals they had erected, and which were 1241 used for the soldiers, were their own—that they belonged to the Brigade; but that was a manœuvre. The public money they had been drawing from year to year was a great deal more than would have bought out the hospitals several times over. As he saw the noble Marquess was only remaining in the House until he (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) had finished his remarks, he would not detain the Committee on this point any longer. The principal reason why he had risen to address the Committee had been to refer to an answer which the noble Marquess had made to him the other day with regard to the vaccination question. He (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) had brought under the notice of the noble Marquess the case of certain men who were vaccinated in Holland, and who were, through that vaccination, poisoned, so that some of them were rendered exceedingly ill, and some of them died. In consequence of that, the Netherlands Parliament insisted on compulsory vaccination in the Netherlands Army being abolished, and a Circular to that effect was issued. He (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) had asked the noble Marquess if he had information in regard to it, and the noble Marquess said he had not, but had promised to make inquiries. He had also said that he had no intention to put a stop to compulsory vaccination in the Army; and as to the provision under which he, as Secretary of State, claimed to be enabled to compel vaccination or re-vaccination in the Army, the noble Marquess had given no answer at all—which necessitated a further inquiry. Subsequently, the noble Marquess had said that the medical regulations prescribed compulsory vaccination; but that was no answer to the question asked, because the medical regulations could not possibly be of higher authority than the Secretary of State himself; and what he (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) had wanted to elicit was the authority under which the Secretary of State, whether by Regulations, or Circulator other means of communication with medical authorities, claimed the right to compel vaccination. Well, he (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) had referred to the medical regulations, which were in effect that every recruit, without further exemption, should be vaccinated on joining the depot to which he belonged, unless the operation was certified to have been 1242 performed successfully subsequently to enlistment. The medical list of every regiment was to furnish records as to the vaccination or re-vaccination that would take place where there was no statement to that effect. Then, he had further inquired from the noble Marquess what authority the Secretary of State had for issuing such a Regulation as that, and the noble Marquess had referred him to the 14th section, paragraph 14, of the Queen's Regulations—
Medical officers doing duty with the troops will, in all medical and sanitary duties, be guided by the Army Medical Regulations and by such instructions as they may, from time to time, receive from the principal medical officers of the district.The noble Marquess claimed that those words justified the medical regulations he had quoted, and on which he took his stand, the force of the Queen's Regulations themselves. What he (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) wanted to point out to the Committee was that, after all, there was in that no more answer, no more force, no more argument, no more ground than there was in the first response. These Regulations were issued by the Secretary of State. The Queen's Regulations were, he would not say issued by the Secretary of State, but, at any rate, the Secretary of State derived, either from the State, or from the Crown, what authority he possessed. The noble Marquess would not dispute that his authority was either derived from the State, or from the instruments of his appointment. With regard to the Statutory authority, it must be derived from Acts passed with reference to the Master General of the Ordnance, or to the Secretary of State for War, or the Office into which these two appointments had been blended, and which the noble Marquess now occupied. In no single Act of Parliament, however, relating to these high Offices, could a single word be produced on which could be grounded this claim on the part of the Secretary of State to enforce compulsory vaccination. The most recent measure was the Army Act of 1881; but there was not one single word in that Act—just as there was not one single word in the Mutiny Act—on which such a preposterous claim could be based. There was no Statutory authority for this claim—nothing in the batch of appointments to which he had referred. There 1243 was no mention of any such power; and, even if there were, the Secretary of State would possess no such power, because the Crown, which conveyed power—that was the power of the Prerogative itself—did not possess the right to compel men to be vaccinated against their will. It would be a most extraordinary thing, if they were informed that the Crown had an inherent right to compel any subject, military or civil, to submit to a surgical operation against his will. He (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) wondered what the public in this country, or in any other country, would say, if it were suddenly made known that the execution of circumcision were to be revived at the will of the Crown, whatever ground might be alleged for it. The thing would be simply laughed at. But, as a matter of principle, that stood on the same ground as this claim of the Secretary of State for War to the right to enforce vaccination and re-vaccination. This claim having no foundation of a legal kind either in Prerogative, as derived from the Crown, or of a Statutory nature, he imagined that the Army Regulations were altogether ultra vires. The Secretary of State had no right to issue such Regulations, which were an interference with the liberty of the subject without warrant. There was not one of the soldiers or recruits, subject to this treatment, but could claim the protection which the Secretary of State for War himself was bound to afford him against the illegal claims of the military or regimental authorities. He (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) did not wish to take the sense of the Committee on the subject, by moving a reduction to the Vote; but he should like to know from the noble Marquess whether he had any reply to make to the arguments which he had ventured to submit, with regard to what he believed to be the undue claims of the Crown on the one hand, and the rights of the soldiers on the other; because it was perfectly unreasonable to suppose that the objection to compulsory vaccination was entirely confined to the civil population? As a matter of fact, that was not so; although, of course, it was very great amongst the civil population. In one place alone, in Eastbourne, no less than 60 summonses were issued for non-compliance with the vaccination regulations on Monday. When they found, in one place, such an enormous number of 1244 summonses, it was impossible that there could not be a considerable amount of opposition to vaccination amongst the general public; and, if that were so, there was bound to be objections on the part of the soldiery. He (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) hoped to hear from the noble Marquess that he was prepared to reconsider the decision he announced the other day, to maintain this system of compulsory vaccination. He had received a letter from a gentleman who had recently been travelling in Holland, and that gentleman assured him that the facts he (Mr. O'Connor) had put in his Question were correct. This gentleman had informed him that of 68 recruits vaccinated, eight of them were subsequently found to be suffering from erysipelas, and three had died. He had not brought forward the inquiry on this subject without having good ground and good information—he did not now make a complaint with regard to the assumption of authority by the noble Marquess, without, at any rate, being able to put forward an argument which, at first sight, appeared to be sound.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he had made careful inquiries into the subject, in consequence of the Question put by the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) the other day, and he was unable to find a single instance of a recruit having objected to be re-vaccinated. As to the particular question, whether the Secretary of State had a legal right to issue an Order requiring every recruit to be re-vaccinated, it had never been brought before a Court of Law; and, therefore, there was no legal decision on the point. He had told the hon. Member the other day that he did not claim power under the express provision of any Act of Parliament. The power under which the Secretary of State acted, was that by which he made a great variety of regulations for the discipline and efficiency of the Army. He imagined that, even though he were not acting on the authority of an Act of Parliament, it was undoubtedly within the power of the Secretary of State to advise Her Majesty, on his responsibility—and he was responsible to Parliament for the advice he gave—as to the manner in which she should exercise her Prerogative in respect to the Army. It was surely within the power of the Secretary of State to 1245 act on what was considered to be the best medical opinion as regarded the preservation of the health of the Army. The Secretary of State, surely, had as much power to order vaccination as he had to order any sanitary regulation. That was the opinion he entertained of the case. He did not, however, deny that, from a legal point of view, there might be arguments on the other side; but this was the view on which the Secretaries of State had always acted.
§ MR. HOPWOODsaid, he really would ask the noble Marquess to be well advised, as this matter might at any time be raised in a Court of Law. It might be that no recruit had hitherto refused to submit to this operation; but it might be that, before long, someone would refuse. This compulsion to vaccination was a public mischief, constantly practised in the name of the law. The arguments of the noble Marquess broke down altogether; because it might be true that he had been allowing the exercise of a power which did more harm than good. No one could complain of anything done for the soldier in an emergency; but if the noble Marquess's argument was right, he was justified in ordering a disease to be put into a soldier, and in ordering that he should submit to intense pain and suffering—[Laughter.]—for, in spite of the laugh of the hon. Member behind him, vaccination did sometimes involve intense pain and suffering. People would obstinately shut their eyes to the facts of the case; but it was incontestible that 53 or more French soldiers in Algiers had been syphilized by its means, and that eight soldiers had suffered in Holland, of whom three had died from the effects of vaccination. He (Mr. Hopwood) was continually, day after day, bringing under the notice of the House cases of children who were suffering cruelly, many of them unto death, from this operation. He contended that the argument of the noble Marquess broke down, if he assumed that, as the Representative of the Queen, he could order any eccentricity the march of science suggested to be inflicted on recruits. He (Mr. Hopwood) contested the right of the Secretary of State to do that. The old theory of the Prerogative was that no one could injure life or limb without the consent of Parliament. Vaccination was something in that direction. ["Oh, oh!"] 1246 Well, he knew hon. Gentlemen thought so highly of the practice that they would sustain it. He (Mr. Hop-wood) did not think so highly of it. Could the Secretary of State order surgical operations, or amputation, even of a finger, against the will of the patient? There were some who would prefer that to the detestable process of vaccination. A finger came within the words "life or limb" of the Army Act. Yet the suffering and constitutional derangement caused by vaccination oftentimes made the operation one dangerous to "life or limb." He (Mr. Hopwood), for one, questioned the power, and he could only say it would be much more seriously questioned later on.
§ MR. WARTONsaid, that all Law Officers should respect the law; and it was perfectly clear that the Queen had the power to order vaccination in the Army, if she chose. After the triumphant vindication of vaccination they had heard from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Edinburgh (Sir Lyon Playfair) the other day—the most interesting speech he (Mr. Warton) had ever heard delivered in the House—he hoped the Committee would allow this discussion to terminate. He hoped the opponents of vaccination would for the future hide their diminished heads, and that the House would never hear anything more about this matter.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (10.) £562,800, Volunteer Corps.
§ MR. TOMLINSONsaid, that, under the circumstances in which this most important Vote was brought on, he did not intend to address any lengthy remarks to the Committee; but he wished, in the first place, to express his regret that no proper time had been given for its discussion. He said that, not only on behalf of himself, but also on behalf of other hon. Members who had been or were members of the Volunteer Force. He had been connected with the Force from the commencement of the movement to the present time; and he could not help saying that he thought it a very great pity that a proper opportunity for a discussion of the important question had not been given. The question was especially interesting now, seeing that the Volunteers were treated as an intregal part of the British Army. As he had said, he should not attempt to discuss 1247 the question. But he considered that the main problem in regard to the Volunteer Force was, how far it was, at the present moment, a reliable means of defence; what were its defects; and how were they to be remedied? It was a very important question. He looked on the Force as being at present in a state of transition, and as not having nearly arrived at the position it ought to attain to in order to secure an adequate and proper defence for the country. The main point to which he wished to draw attention was that of the arming of the Force. The newspapers and journals of the country had drawn attention lately to the question of shooting in the Force. A juster estimate of the degree of skill acquired by the Volunteers with the rifle was now formed than was previously possible when such meetings as those at Wimbledon were alone taken into account. It was not now assumed that the Force had attained a high degree of skill. It was admitted that their skill was very much above that of the Militia; but still there was a great deal to be done. Perhaps, in regard to that, he (Mr. Tomlinson) ought to express the regret with which he had heard the noble Marquess, in reply to an hon. Friend, say that the Volunteers of Middlesex had been deprived temporarily of the use of Wormwood Scrubbs. The effect of that would be to take away from many members of the Force the only opportunity they had of making themselves efficient. As to efficiency, there was one point which attracted a good deal of attention in regard to the Volunteers of the country, and that was the regulation which allowed a recruit or a member of the Force to make himself technically efficient in shooting by merely firing 60 rounds of ammunition at the butts. It was well worthy of consideration whether some different test could not be applied. The principal point he wished to urge was the desirability of arming the Force with a weapon which was fit for active service. The Volunteers were now constantly reminded that they were a part of the Regular Army, and those who so reminded them did not fail to remark upon any point in which the equipment was inefficient. Well, would anyone say that the Volunteers should be allowed to go into the field with a different weapon to that used by the Regulars? 1248 What estimate would foreign nations form of the reality of our reliance on the Volunteer Force and of the organization of our Army if they failed to find it, in such material details as the armament, properly organised? Late as it was, he trusted some Member of the Government would rise in his place, and give them some satisfactory assurance on this matter.
SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, he did not wish to take up the time of the Committee unnecessarily; but he wished to endorse what had fallen from his hon. Friend behind him (Mr. Tomlinson), that some assurance should be given by the Government as to when the Volunteers would be armed with an efficient weapon. This question had been frequently brought under the notice of the Government. The old Snider rifle was completely worn out, and he trusted that a new weapon would now be served out to the men. There was another point to which he wished to draw the attention of the Government. He congratulated them upon having established Schools of Instruction for Volunteer officers. As a commanding officer of a regiment, he could assure the authorities that that was a source of great satisfaction and benefit to the Volunteer officer; but there was one point connected with this matter to which he must call attention. An officer was sent for instruction to the School of Instruction at the Wellington Barracks, or to Aldershot; and, if there were only a certain number sending in their names, he would get a certain allowance whilst he was there. If, however, he was attached to a Line regiment at Aldershot, Plymouth, and so on, he would receive no allowance. He (Sir Henry Fletcher) could not see the distinction made between the two classes of officers. He was placing this matter in a friendly way before the noble Marquess, believing it to be a subject which should be inquired into for the sake of giving satisfaction to the Volunteer officers. With regard to camping, he had been in the habit of camping out his regiment every year for some years. The camp equipage was sent down from Dover to Arundel by ordinary train, where it did duty for eight days' drill, and it was then sent back again, Well, a great deal of cribbing had taken place—blankets and such like had been stolen during the transport to and from the 1249 camp; and that, he thought, should be put a stop to. He had applied last year that a non-commissioned officer should be sent down to look after these matters; but the application had been refused, on account of the expense. Another matter he had to refer to was that he had a General Order, signed by General Taylor, who was at that time Adjutant General, stating that the Commander-in-Chief had directed that no officer of the Auxiliary Forces, or the Reserve, should proceed to the seat of war without the special sanction of His Royal Highness. He (Sir Henry Fletcher) hoped this would not be made a precedent; but that in future, when war had broken out, these Reserve and Auxiliary officers would not be allowed to take part in the campaign. It had created the greatest dissatisfaction amongst the officers of regiments serving in Egypt to find that, although officers were wanted, they were not sent out from England to take part in the war, but that officers of the Auxiliary Forces were allowed to take part in the campaign, and, moreover, had places provided for them in the troopships.
MR. BRANDsaid, the question of arming the Volunteers with Martini-Henry rifles was under the consideration of the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War; but it would involve very large expenditure. The Martini-Henry had been issued to the English Militia, and next it would be issued to the Irish Militia; and, when it could be done, it would be issued to the Volunteers. With respect to the ranges at Wormwood Scrubbs, he regretted that it had been found necessary to close them; but he hoped that the necessity would only be temporary. An accident had nearly happened at these ranges; and an investigation had resulted in a Report that the ranges were not safe. The ranges were, therefore, closed; and the practice was confined to experienced shots. The Inspector General had examined the place, and he had recommended certain alterations; and if it was found that those alterations would make the ranges safe, a sum of money would be taken next year for that purpose.
§ SIR ARTHUR HAYTERsaid, with regard to the matter referred to by the hon. and gallant Baronet (Sir Henry Fletcher), as to allowances to officers coming up for instruction, it was found 1250 that expenses could not be allowed to officers who came up to Wellington but were living with their friends in London.
§ MR. TOMLINSONasked, whether any arrangements would be made to enable Volunteers to shoot at some other ranges while those at Worm wood Scrubbs were closed?
MR. BRAND, in reply, said, he did not see what arrangement could be made pending the inquiry at Wormwood Scrubbs.
§ MR. TOMLINSONfeared that the result of that would be a loss of efficiency on the part of some Volunteers.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (11.) £278,000, Army Reserve Force.
§ SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, he was rather in a difficulty, looking at the time of night, because that was one of the most important Votes that the Committee could possibly have to discuss. Next to the Vote for the Army itself, this Vote certainly deserved the fullest consideration; but its being driven off to that late period of the Session gave no opportunity for discussing the important question of the present condition of the Army Reserve. It would be remembered that, some years ago, it was promised that if the Army was destroyed, as it then was, and if afterwards the short-service system was adopted, we should, by this time, have a most efficient and most effective Reserve. He would not now argue the question of short service; because, in the first place, that was not the time to do so; and, in the second place, the object was not to abuse the short service, but to show that, as it had been carried out, it had been a failure; and he thought he might venture to say that he had on his side not only all the regimental officers in the Army, but he had the great authority of His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, and of Lord Wolseley, the great advocate of short service. One of the great conditions of short service had never been fulfilled—namely, that there should have been added to the number of men in the Army, at any rate, not less than 10,000 men. That was a question for the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Hartington) to carefully consider; and he (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) thought he should be able to show that the present number of men in the Army was utterly inadequate to 1251 carry out all the various duties they had to perform. Some time ago, on the 1st of June, he had made some statements upon this subject. He had called attention to the present position of recruiting for the Army, the waste and crime of the Army, and their effects upon the efficiency of the Army, and of the Reserves; but they were severely criticized. He found no fault with that, so far as the criticisms were accurate; but he had been accused of exaggeration, and of bringing forward matters in a Party spirit. So far as the old officers of the Army and the regimental officers were concerned, he would venture to say that the noble Marquess would not contradict what he was about to say. Nearly all that had been done in the past had been done by the carrying out of the regimental system by those very regimental officers who had never failed to do their duty under any circumstances, and in however difficult positions they might have found themselves. It was too much the custom in the present day to say that the regimental officers were inferior to the Staff officers; but he would venture to say that, taking them man for man, if the Staff officers had learnt half as much of the regimental duties as the regimental officers understood, there would not have been those feelings between one class and another in our Army which did, but never ought to exist. Looking at the gallant and distinguished Staff officers who commanded at Majuba Hill, and at the regimental officers who commanded and did duty at Rorke's Drift, under most trying circumstances, he thought he had a right to say that the regimental officers were ready, willing, and anxious, wherever placed, to do their duty. The accusation was, that because it was not so easy to drive the untried team of boys who were now placed under them, therefore they were idle, and did not wish to do their duty, and wanted to have old soldiers, simply because they were easier to drive than young soldiers. He entirely denied that accusation, and what he held was, that the authorities had never given these men an opportunity of having regiments at home which were ready to do, and capable of doing, the duties placed upon them. The noble Marquess knew that that was true. Many regiments, nominally of 450 men, really had not more than 300; 1252 and how many of these were fit for and doing duty? What had they to do? They had to find for their twin battalions, in India or elsewhere, a number averaging from 180 to 200 men in the course of the year; and what was left to them when that was done? If they were in a garrison town, how many men did the commanding officers find fit for the heavy duties a regiment had to perform? How many nights had these young soldiers in bed? Three nights in a week; and the explanation given was that the country was not prepared to spend sufficient money to enable the authorities at the War Office to increase the Army, so as properly to carry out its duties. It was one of the greatest mistakes that could be advanced that the country was not prepared to pay that which it knew to be a necessity. If the noble Marquess had the courage to come down to that House and to state that the Army was inefficient for carrying on the duties placed upon it, the country would cheerfully bear any burden which might be necessary on that account. But the noble Marquess knew perfectly well that many of these men, when they had joined the Army, were absolutely unfit for the duties imposed upon them. In the course of a speech at the Mansion House the other evening the noble Marquess made some remarks upon the Army; and he placed, as clearly as a man could place before the country, the value he put on the action at Tel-el-Kebir, and the way in which our soldiers had done their duty; but he declared that he did not look upon that action as a great victory, nor on Arabi as a great commander. But he said, and said truly, that "there were few countries—and, perhaps, none—that could send off 30,000 men 3,000 miles by sea, and place them at the seat of war in the creditable way in which we had sent our men off; and in that he (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) believed the noble Marquess was perfectly right. Now, he came to another point—namely, the number of men it was necessary to call out in sending our Army to Egypt. The whole Army in Egypt numbered 32,000 men, of whom a portion went from India, a portion from the Mediterranean, and 18,800 from home. The Reserve were called out; but of these men only 4,300 were sent to Egypt. But the home duties could not have been carried out 1253 unless, with those sent to Egypt, rather more than 10,000 Reserve men had been called out to fill up the gaps made in the Home Army. It was rather hard for the papers to say that he had grossly exaggerated the state of the case, seeing that what he had stated was the statement of Lord Wolseley as Adjutant General. If another war occurred we should have to call out the Reserves again, and what he thought should be done was to increase that Reserve as much as possible; and he thought the noble Marquess had taken a step in the right direction by presenting a Memorandum defining certain plans both for shorter and also for the extension of the Service. By that scheme the Brigade of Guards would be able, after a certain time, to extend the period of service to 21 years, and the Line regiments would be able to do the same. He presumed and hoped that the noble Marquess intended this extension to be continuous; because, if such a rule was laid down, and when the ranks were filled no further extensions of service were to be granted, that would be one of the most mischievous things possible in regard to recruiting. He had always held that we ought to have at least 25 per cent of old soldiers in every regiment in the Service; and if we extended the term of service from 7 to 12 years we should have done much to make our regiments efficient. But there was a class of men who would, perhaps, like to go into the Army for three or four years; and if we took those men, as was now proposed, we should get men who would look to going back to their occupations, and we should give them a chance of doing so; but it should be a condition of taking them for this short period that they should be of good character, and should know their work thoroughly before leaving their regiments; for, in talking of the Reserves, it should be remembered that when the Reserve was called out to fill up the gaps in the regiments at home only those who had recently gone into the Reserve were called out. The Government did not call out the older men, and he thought they wore, perhaps, right in not doing so, when they wanted men in a hurry, because those men had not been called out to go through annually their drill or to keep up their knowledge of the rifle, which he thought such men, to be 1254 efficient, ought to go through. Until that was done, we should not know whether we had an efficient Reserve or not. In that respect he held that the Government had failed to do their duty. The Reserves considered that they ought not to be called out for small wars, and he believed that question had had a serious effect upon the present position of the Reserve; but what he wished to point out was that, whether the war was great or small, as our Army was at present constituted, we had to call out the Reserves, otherwise we should not have sufficient soldiers to send out of the country. The noble Marquess had stated that it was found necessary to have these men better drilled before they were put into the ranks; and he had given an order that they should remain with their regimental centres for three months, or something like that time. But three months were not long enough, and he (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) thought a leaf might be taken out of the book of some of our principal regiments. The Guards had their men drilled at Caterham; the Rifle Brigade and the 60th Rifles sent their men to Winchester; the Marines—and no men distinguished themselves more than the Marines in the late war—sent their men to Walmer, whore they were kept till they knew their work thoroughly. They had most excellent officers and non-commissioned officers, who knew the class of men they had to deal with, and all their peculiarities and infirmities. Nothing could be more irksome to men taken from the plough, or from the factory, than to be put into uniform, and set to drill from morning to night, and then to go to school; and it required the best and kindest men as officers and non-commissioned officers, who could show them how to get through the work with pleasure. Another important point was that our soldiers did not get enough to eat; and when the hon. Member for Scarborough (Mr. Came) talked of our soldiers getting drunk, he (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) would tell him that it was the want of sufficient food that led many of the men to take something as a stimulant which they otherwise would not take. Again, the men found, when they went into barracks, that there were more stoppages than they expected, and that they did not get the clear amount of pay which had been promised them. It was quite 1255 true that they got their uniform; but it was also true that during drill the uniform was very much worn, and they were charged for repairs which they had not expected. If they were to have the right class of men they must be better fed, and the pay must be paid directly into their hands. After a man had enlisted and was properly drilled, he ought to know whether he was to remain with his regiment at home, or be sent away to India. For instance, at present, two brothers might join a regiment; and while one was kept at home for seven years' service, the other might be sent to India and have to serve eight years, and be kept for nine years if there happened to be a war going on. Every man should know what he would have to do, and should be allowed to remain with the officers and men whom he knew; and, if that plan were adopted, a far better feeling would spring up than at present existed. We ought to have 10,000 more men to carry out the duties of the Army properly, and no regiment ought to be less than 600 strong; otherwise, it would be impossible for the men to perform the multifarious duties required in a garrison town. He wished, further, to refer to another branch of the Service—the Cavalry. The noble Marquess had stated that he had no intention of dealing with that branch of the Service at present; and he (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) was very glad to have heard that statement. In the Cavalry there was no lack of recruits; the discipline was much better than in the Infantry; and the men knew their officers, because they remained in the same regiments. What was necessary for the Cavalry was that instead of a troop there should be a squadron at Canterbury or elsewhere, from every regiment serving abroad—each squadron to be commanded by a field officer of its own regiment. A few weeks ago he made a statement which was thought to be very strong, and that was that 1,400 men had joined one regiment of Infantry in two years. He never exaggerated facts; and he had a Return from the regiment which showed that in two years 1,448 men had joined. It was stated that recruiting had been increasing; but he would advise the noble Marquess to go to the St. George's Barracks, and not be satisfied with seeing the men in their clothes, but have them examined in order to learn whether they were men 1256 or boys—whether they were 16 or 17 years of age, because that slight difference of age was a most serious matter. Next, he would ask the noble Marquess whether the Order was not plain that men considered eligible might be taken at 5 feet 3 inches?—a height under which, he believed, men had not been taken since 1859. If men of that class were taken, they would have to be fed, and otherwise provided for, during two or three years, before they would be fit to go abroad, and fight the battles of their country. He would now ask the attention of the noble Marquess to the number of men of the Infantry who were fit to be put into line. He had bestowed a good deal of trouble on this calculation; and he found there were at home 72 battalions of Infantry, and seven battalions of the Guards. If he took the numbers voted in the Estimates, there would be something like 45,380 Infantry, and 5,600 of the Guards; but he believed, notwithstanding the recruiting which was going on, that the regiments at home would show a deficiency of something like 5,000 men. He would, however, take, without any deduction, the full number of men on the Estimates—that was to say, 45,380 Infantry of the Line and 5,600 Guards. Amongst the Infantry there were 4,000 men or more under 20 years of age, and who would not be, by the present Orders, allowed to go to India; but, passing by these, there were besides, amongst the number mentioned, 17,000 recruits who had not learned their duty, and could not, therefore, be relied upon. Taking these into account, there would remain only 34,000 men available for the first line of defence. If they wished to fill up the ranks of the Army at home to the war strength, they would require altogether 79,000, putting each battalion at 1,000 men; and here he would remark that when the regiments were sent out to Egypt, they were, instead of 1,000, only 750 or 800 strong. How was the number to be made up? It was said there were 32,000 men of the Reserve; but he should put down the number that could be relied upon as 28,000; and these could no doubt be called out, and put into line to-morrow if necessary. Then there were 27,000 men of the Militia Reserve, who could be taken; and these two bodies of Reserves, being 1257 added to the 34,000 above referred to, would, if they all came out, rather more than make up the war complement. They must remember, however, that many of the Militia might not turn out, and also many might be unfit for service. But what had they to fall back upon? There were the 17,000 recruits, and the rest of the Militia and the Volunteers. Now, he asked whether that was a state of things creditable to the country, looking to the position of France, and the extraordinary credit she had taken for the Army, as well as what she was doing for her Navy, and bearing in mind the statement of Lord Wolseley on the Channel Tunnel Scheme, with reference to the prevention of the landing of a French Army with the force at our command? He thought it right, upon this most important Vote, to draw the attention of the noble Marquess to the facts he had brought forward, and he would ask him to visit some of our principal stations himself; and if he did so, he (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) felt sure he would come to the conclusion that the Army was not in a proper condition. Let the noble Marquess go to Aldershot, unattended by those officers who generally surrounded him; let him converse with the commanding officers of any regiment that he thought fit to call to the front, who would give him all the information he required, and which would enable him to form a sound judgment upon all the points to which he had thought it his duty to call the noble Marquess's most earnest and anxious attention. Amongst other things, the noble Marquess would see that his (Sir Walter B. Barttelot's) statement as to the deterioration of discipline was correct. By that statement he was prepared to stand, it being borne in mind that he had pointed out that the Cavalry discipline was superior to the discipline of the Infantry. He would conclude by expressing his conviction that if the noble Marquess would do as he had suggested, he would earn the gratitude not only of that House, but of the Army and the country at large.
SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, he would venture again to refer to a matter that he had, on two former occasions, laid before the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when he filled the Office of Secretary of State for 1258 War. He referred to the drafts of men from newly-arrived regiments for employment as clerks and messengers in the divisional offices; and, notwithstanding that the regiments in garrison towns were no doubt weak, he had urged that these places should be filled by men of the Army Reserve. He took the opportunity presented by the Vote of calling the attention of the noble Marquess to the subject, in the hope that he would see the desirability of carrying out the suggestion he had made.
§ MR. PULESTONsaid, his hon. and gallant Friend behind him (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) had referred to an agreeable statement made a few days ago at the Mansion House by the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War, to the effect that, up to that time, 5,000 more recruits had been enlisted this year than last. It would be gratifying to the country if, in addition to the number, the noble Marquess could state that the men were superior in character to those enlisted under the recent system.
§ COLONEL ALEXANDERsaid, the Committee, as well as the country, were, in his opinion, deeply indebted to his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for West Sussex (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) for the clear, vigorous, and perspicuous language in which he had more than once, in the course of the Session, described the serious and critical condition of the Reserves, and also the condition of recruiting throughout the country. His hon. and gallant Friend was right in saying that the question of Reserves was intimately connected with that of recruiting. The two systems must stand or fall together; because on what else than our recruits were we to depend for our Reserves, three or, it might be, six years hence? He was glad that some time had elapsed since this question was last discussed, because it had enabled them to consider the proposals formulated by Her Majesty's Government to meet what was admitted to be the serious deficiency in the number of recruits; and he was bound to say that, having studied those proposals, together with the speech of the noble Marquess, they appeared to him to be totally inadequate to arrest the progress of the evil with which they had at present to cope. The noble Marquess, in the first 1259 place, proposed to arrest temporarily the progress of men from the active Army into the Reserve; and that, it appeared to him, was an admission of the complete breakdown of the short-service system. For 12 years they had been laboriously building up an Army Reserve, by prematurely forcing men into it from the active Army; and they had at last been able to scrape together 32,000 of the 80,000 men that were originally promised by Lord Cardwell, and now they were going to take a step to check the course of that system. We seemed, in respect of the system of short service, to be like the man described in the parable as beginning to build a house without counting the cost, and being afterwards exposed to the derision of his neighbours because he could not finish it. In order to build up a Reserve the country had sacrificed its active Army; they had filled its ranks with boys, because they were comforted by the assurance that they would obtain thereby a trustworthy and reliable Reserve; but if they could not maintain the Reserve in an efficient condition, he said that the motive for short service ceased to exist. The noble Marquess seemed to acknowledge that himself, because he had returned, as the right hon. and gallant Member for North Lancashire (Colonel Stanley) had described it, to "permissive long service." But it needed no prophet to say that that return must be a failure; and he hoped he did the noble Marquess no injustice by saying that he expected it would not succeed, although, of course, the noble Marquess did not like to admit that it would be a failure. The noble Marquess, in his speech delivered in that House on the 1st of June last, confidently anticipated the failure of the proposal when he said—
It may appear that, in these proposals, there is some risk of increasing the Pension Vote; but that, in my opinion, is not a very serious risk, because at the expiration of 12 years the men will be entitled to £36 as deferred pay. But they would not be entitled to that deferred pay until they leave the Army in the event of their re-enlisting, and the prospect of receiving £36 in ready money will weigh very strongly with them when they consider whether they should re-enlist or leave the Army."—(3 Hansard, [279] 1556.)He (Colonel Alexander) agreed that the prospect of receiving £36 deferred pay would act strongly, and deter all but an 1260 infinitesimal portion of the men from continuing with the Colours, in order to qualify for a pension which they might possibly lose by the breakdown of health or some other circumstance. The horror in which the War Office held all pensions was exemplified by the fact that the sergeant who happened to commit himself in the course of his second engagement lost all claim to a pension by being compelled to take an immediate discharge. Then, the proposals of the noble Marquess were without any element of permanency, because they were entirely dependent on the state of recruiting throughout the country, and on the number of men who, at any particular time, might feel inclined to adopt the new system. Now, it seemed to him that certainty was the very essence of this question. It was uncertainty as to the time during which the men were to serve, and uncertainty as to the regiment in which they were to serve, which made service in the Army so unpopular, and deterred men from enlisting. The conditions of the Warrant lately issued were so complicated that it was absolutely impossible for a man desiring to enlist to understand it; and a high official engaged in administering recruiting throughout the country had told him that he had himself the greatest difficulty in interpreting the conditions of the Warrant. Under those circumstances, it appeared to him that the proposals were a delusion and a snare, and that they afforded no real test as to the number who would, on more favourable conditions, agree to prolong their service with the Colours. £36 down, after 12 years' service, would always carry the day against a problematic pension. As his hon. and gallant Friend had remarked, the noble Marquess, in his speech at the Mansion House, had stated that the recruits were coming in more freely. He was glad to hear that; but he believed the Scots Guards were still 400 below their strength. It must, however, be remembered that this increase in the number of recruits had been obtained by the relaxation of the medical conditions as to age, height, and chest measurement, so carefully established by the noble Marquess's Predecessors in Office. His hon. and gallant Friend had referred to the statement of Lord Morley, in the House of Lords on Tuesday last, that the minimum standard 1261 of height for the Army was still 5 feet 4 inches; but he (Colonel Alexander) held in his hand a letter, dated the 27th of April last, from the Inspector General of Recruiting, directing the enlistment of men for the Infantry of the Line, of 5 feet 3 inches in height and 33 inches chest measurement, and that Circular Letter was still in force; so that he contended, in spite of Lord Morley's statement, that 5 feet 3 inches, and not 5 feet 4 inches, was the standard of height for the Army. Under those circumstances, the noble Marquess had nothing to boast of in the fact that he had a larger number of men, because a reduction of standard would always insure that result; and if it were now reduced to 5 feet 2 inches a still greater number of men would be obtained than the noble Marquess had at present. He would conclude by saying that if Her Majesty's Government desired to establish an efficient system of recruiting the conditions of enlistment should be laid down once for all, and never relaxed.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he shared in the regret that had been expressed that so important a discussion should take place so late in the Session; but he must remind the Committee that already two, if not three, discussions on the Army had already taken place; one on the evening when the Estimates were introduced, when the debate turned on the very subject brought forward on the present occasion; another on the Vote for the Administration of Martial Law; and a third discussion, which was raised on going into Committee of Supply by the hon. and gallant Baronet the Member for West Sussex (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) himself. With regard to the debate of that evening, he (the Marquess of Hartington) was unable to say that he had heard anything new, or, indeed, anything that he had not heard at least once or twice before; and, therefore, he thought that it was entirely unnecessary to follow the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) in respect of a large portion of his speech. His (the Marquess of Hartington's) Predecessors in Office, he would not say on that side of the House alone, but on both sides, and he himself, also, had expressed their opinion on the subject of short service, and the impossibility of a return to the system of long service, so greatly regretted by hon. and 1262 gallant Gentlemen opposite. Everyone who had great responsibility in this matter being of opinion that a return to long service was an impossibility, was it not a waste of the time of Parliament that, instead of making new suggestions, nothing should be heard from hon. and gallant Gentlemen opposite but lamentations over a system that had passed away? Now, his hon. and gallant Friend had spoken of the small strength of the battalions, and had asked how a battalion of 450 men could furnish drafts of 250 men for India and the Colonies. In the first place, he (the Marquess of Hartington) had to point out that they had in the present Session raised the strength of the battalion from 450 to 520 men, a number which did not very greatly fall short of that which his hon. and gallant Friend had mentioned. Although the Establishment of 520 was voted by Parliament, it would always be the case, as he had pointed out in introducing the Army Estimates, that the average strength of the battalions throughout the year could not be equal to the Establishment voted, which could not be exceeded. If, then, the hon. and gallant Gentleman thought that the average strength of the battalion ought never to be lower than 600, he was really advocating a considerable increase of the existing Establishment; but if he only advocated the Establishment voted by Parliament, then he (the Marquess of Hartington) would point out that there was no great difference between that which he proposed and that which already existed. The hon. and gallant Gentleman had said that the battalions were quite unfit for garrison duty. But, although it had been admitted by his Predecessors that the battalions, while they remained at a lower strength, would have to supply the necessary drafts for India and the Colonies, and form cadres which could be fitted for service, it had never been contended that they were ready to take the field, or that they were ready to undertake severe garrison service. Garrison duty, owing to the necessity of keeping a large portion of the Army in Ireland, had, no doubt, been very heavy; but he would point out that that was no condemnation of the short-service system. He had been asked whether the alterations announced when this subject was last discussed were temporary or 1263 permanent? Certainly, there was no intention of continuing them longer than the necessity for them existed. Whatever view might be taken hereafter, they were not pledged, either to Parliament or to the country, to make the changes more than temporary. The hon. and gallant Member said they could do nothing more unwise than make them temporary. But he was unable to perceive the force of that argument. If, when they enlisted the men on one set of conditions, they should afterwards say that the circumstances had changed, and that those conditions no longer applied, that, he would admit, would not only be unwise, but very unfair; but he could see no unfairness, or want of wisdom, in not making permanent that which had been adopted as a temporary measure. Reference had been made to what was called the reduction of the standard, and it was said that 5 feet 3 inches was the lowest standard we had had in time of war. There had been some misunderstanding on this subject. The minimum standard was that at which the recruiting officer was bound to take a man who was medically sound. But relaxation was not reduction of the standard; and the recruiting officer was not bound to accept a man of 5 feet 3 inches or 5 feet 4 inches, even if he was medically sound. He had only to take a man of 5 feet 3 inches or 5 feet 4 inches if the recruiting officer was of opinion that the recruit was eligible as a recruit, and was likely to become an efficient soldier. Therefore, the reduction to 5 feet 3 inches was not absolutely a reduction of the minimum. The hon. and gallant Member had asked how many men could be put into line in an emergency. He (the Marquess of Hartington) would not follow the hon. and gallant Member into a calculation of those numbers, because everybody could ascertain the number. The hon. and gallant Member was able to make deductions from the nominal strength of our Army, and say this set of men should not be admitted, or that set of men should be left behind; but no two calculations would agree. But he (the Marquess of Hartington) could state how much the Army was below the Establishment voted by Parliament, and what had been done to reduce that deficiency. He had stated in June that he expected the deficiency at home and in India would amount to 8,000 men, 1264 and might amount to 13,000. We had now passed the most critical period. The great flow of men, through discharge and transfer to the Reserves, had now ceased; and, on the other hand, the recruits were coming in rapidly. That had been the case during the last three or four weeks; and, for the first time, the supply of recruits had been in excess of the men who had taken their discharge, or been transferred. For the next two months this drain, which had been comparatively slack, would, he hoped, continue as slight.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked from what sources the recruits were coming in?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON, in reply, said, that he was not speaking on that point, but on the numbers. He had stated that he expected the deficiency might be 13,000, and the deficiency amounted to 11,000 in all arms and ranks. The Infantry in India was 4,712 below its Establishment; in the Colonies 2,794, and at home 971—total, 8,477. That was a deficiency which must tend to diminish. The hon. and gallant Member for South Ayrshire (Colonel Alexander) had been extremely severe on the War Office, and the relaxation of some of the existing Medical Regulations; but some of those Regulations which had been relaxed were imposed partly because the supply of recruits was, at the time, greater than was desired, and it was absolutely necessary to place some check upon it. In July, 1881, the Army was 1,300 below its Establishment, and at that time it was considered that the age might be raised from 18 to 19 years; but, notwithstanding that, the recruits still came in so rapidly that 14,000 were enlisted in the six months prior to January, 1882, and there was an excess of 2,250. It became necessary to systematize the process of allowing men to go into the Reserve before the expiration of the six years, and, for a time, men of three years' service were allowed to pass into the Reserve; and in the 12 months from July, 1881, to June, 1882, 3,500 men so went into the Reserve before their time had expired. At the same time, the Medical Regulations, which the hon. and gallant Member said never ought to have been relaxed, were made more stringent, partly in order to impose a check. The effect of that step was that 1265 in the middle of 1882 the numbers were brought down to the Establishment. What was not foreseen at that time was that a large number of men had been enlisted in 1870–1 under the old system of obtaining their discharge at the end of 1882. If that abnormal drain in that year had been foreseen, it was probable that those Regulations would not have been imposed, and the Army would have been allowed to remain for a time somewhat over its Establishment. Finding that in the present year the Army was considerably below the Establishment, the natural, and obvious, and necessary course was to first reverse the course taken by his Predecessor at the War Office, when other circumstances prevailed. To some extent, the stringency of the conditions had been relaxed, and the result was that we were now getting 700 recruits a-week. Notwithstanding that, the hon. and gallant Member for South Ayrshire had stated not only that the Reserves were in an unfortunate condition, but that the Army was in an inefficient state, through the deficiency of recruits. He (the Marquess of Hartington) maintained that there was no deficiency of recruits. The existing short-service system had shown that it was capable of doing that which the long-service system, which some hon. Members so much regretted, never did—it could supply the necessary number of recruits for the service of the Army in that year. The deficiency was entirely owing to additional restrictions, when it was supposed that the Army was too full, and also to an abnormal drain. There was no reason whatever for supposing that when these abnormal influences were removed, and only a normal number of men were required, recruiting would be insufficient. With regard to the Reserve itself, he could only say that in the speeches that had been made, no new suggestions were put forward—no help was given to the military authorities; and it seemed to be out of the power of hon. Gentlemen opposite, who criticized the War Office, to offer any suggestion, except a return to the long service, which had been admitted by everyone else to be absolutely impossible.
SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, the only suggestion he had made was, that Reserve men should be employed as messengers and clerks.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, his right hon. Friend the Postmaster General had been able to give employment to several Reserve men in connection with the Parcels Post.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked, whether the noble Marquess could inform the Committee from what particular recruiting field these large numbers of men were coming in—at the rate of 100 a-day—whether from the urban or the agricultural districts?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he could not tell; but there had been recruiting going on all over the country. The recruits were not entirely urban.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (12.) £34,000, Miscellaneous Effective Services.
§
(13.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £241,800, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for the Salaries and Miscellaneous Charges of the War Office, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1884.
§ MR. PULESTONsaid, he wished to speak on Vote 15. Was this Vote 15?
§ SIR JOHN HAYsaid, three or four hon. and gallant Members had been waiting to discuss special matters, one of which was the question of the Contagious Diseases Acts. He understood that that Vote had not been reached, and he should move to report Progress, and take some other opportunity to discuss these matters.
THE CHAIRMANI thought the hon. Member (Mr. Puleston) was on the wrong Vote. If he had asked me, I should have told him.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, he was quite aware of the intentions of his hon. Friend (Mr. Puleston) to raise this question on Vote 15, and he himself wished to raise the question; but, seeing his hon. Friend rise, he hesitated to do so, and now he found himself precluded from discussing the subject.
§ MR. PULESTONIt was distinctly understood that a discussion on the Contagious Diseases Acts should be raised; and in this I will be borne out, I am sure, by the noble Marquess and other 1267 Members of the Government. Unless this discussion is now permitted I must move to report Progress.
§ SIR JOHN HAYsaid, the subjects to which he wished to call attention had no reference to Vote 16. He wished to refer to medals and decorations.
THE CHAIRMANThere are miscellaneous charges under Vote 16. I think it will be perfectly in Order to deal with questions under Vote 15 upon Vote 16, which applies to miscellaneous charges.
§ MR. PULESTONsaid, he had no intention to propose any Resolution, at that late hour and time of the Session, with reference to the vote of the House on the Contagious Diseases Acts; but he thought it of great importance, both locally and nationally, that the Committee should know, before separating, what the policy of the Government upon this subject was going to be. Statistics of a very alarming character had already come in, showing the vastly-increasing injury that was being done to men in the Army and the Navy, particularly those in garrison towns, through the recent action of the Government. The opinions of the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War, and of the First Lord of the Admiralty, and the Secretary of State for the Home Department—the three Departments concerned in the administration of the Acts—upon this subject were well known. Without any precedent whatever, legislative force had been given to an abstract Resolution—a Resolution passed in obedience to what might be called some maudlin sentimentality; and the reason given for that extraordinary step by the Government was that, in withdrawing the compulsory powers of the Acts, and making the Acts practically nugatory, they were acting simply in obedience to the vote of the House. That, however, was a reason which would not hold water for a moment, for everyone knew that if a strong Government, with a great majority, put into the Estimates a sum for the police expenses, as usual, there would be no question whatever raised 1268 against that. He ventured to say that neither the hon. and learned Member for Stockport (Mr. Hopwood), nor the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Halifax (Mr. Stansfeld), who had succeeded in getting the Resolution passed, in his wildest imagination, thought that such prompt effect would be given to the passing of the Resolution. It would have been intelligible if a Bill had been brought forward to repeal, or amend, or alter the Act; and if the Government had taken that course, the House and the country would have considered that they had acted in good faith in regard to the voice of Parliament as expressed in that Resolution. In answer to a deputation, the Secretary of State for the Home Department had said it was shocking to contemplate the effect of the action of the Government, if the fears of the deputation were realized; and the result of the course taken by the Government had never been more graphically described. [Sir WILLIAM HARCOURT: I did not say that.] He begged the right hon. Gentleman's pardon; he was very frank, and used the word "shocking" with great emphasis. It was pointed out that prior to the passing of these Acts the average number of deaths of women in Portsmouth alone had been 120 yearly; but after the Acts came into operation it was only three. The noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War had given answers the other day, in reply to Questions put in the House, as to the already terrible effects of the withdrawal of the police examination; and he said the state of things in connection with this matter was something appalling. If that was the condition of things already in three or four months, what was it likely to be in the months between now and Parliament re-assembling? Surely that was sufficient reason for his (Mr. Puleston's) rising at the eleventh hour to try to find out what the immediate policy of the Government was to be. The Prime Minister had been very emphatic the other day, in reply to an hon. Member, as to having great regard to carrying out the law in spirit and in letter; but all that was now asked of him was that the same loyalty to the law should be shown in this case, especially when the consequences would be otherwise appalling. The noble Marquess, when he spoke on this subject some time ago, said these 1269 Acts were not passed to promote the morality of certain districts; but if Devonport, Chatham, Plymouth, and Portsmouth were used as garrison towns in the interest of the nation, certainly this became at once an Imperial question, and the residents in those towns had a right to some protection by the law. This disease was becoming worse and worse, and it was no exaggeration to say that the people in these towns were all but in a state of panic on the subject. The right hon. and learned Gentleman the Judge Advocate General (Mr. Osborne Morgan) had made a very strong speech on this matter differing from the Prime Minister; and the statistics which had reached him (Mr. Puleston) would more than justify every word of that speech. This question being one of such great importance to the towns in which the Acts had been enforced, and to the country at large, in view of the effect on our Army and Navy, he thought the Committee had a right to expect, and he hoped they would have some explicit statement from the noble Marquess as to what might be expected from the Government.
MR. ACLANDsaid, that feeling, as he did, how very important it was that the opinions of those who had had actual experience of the moral, as well as the sanitary, results of the operation of these Acts in the towns in which they had been enforced should be carefully gathered, he was most anxious that, whatever course the Government might think fit to take in consequence of the Resolution which was passed by the House early in the Session, it should be announced beforehand. Hon. Members would then have an opportunity of ascertaining what was the real feeling of the country with regard to the precautions which ought to be made use of in reference to these terrible diseases. He quite understood and appreciated the feelings of those whose opinions with regard to the moral effects of these particular Acts he did not altogether share; and he appreciated, as he had said in the course of the debate early this Session, the thoroughly justifiable character of the intentions of those who conducted the agitation against these Acts. But he was convinced that there was a strong feeling existing amongst those who had, not shared in that agitation that if the Government acted under the recent vote 1270 of the House, some positive precautions should be taken with the object of protecting the inhabitants of these towns from what appeared to be the very terrible result of the relaxation of these Acts.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, that the hon. Member for Devon-port (Mr. Puleston) had used an entirely new argument in this matter. The hon. Gentleman had not dwelt only on the effect of the suspension of the compulsory examination upon our soldiers and sailors, or upon the increase of disease—he had based his claim for the retention of the complete operation of these Acts upon the preservation of order in the district which he represented and in other similar districts. The hon. Member said that the Government sent a large number of troops and sailors into such towns as Plymouth and Devonport, and that the inhabitants of such towns had a right to ask the Government for protection from the consequences of that large influx of men. He (the Marquess of Hartington) would venture to say that that was a totally new argument, and one that had not been heard in these discussions before. As a matter of fact, these Acts gave no power whatever to the police for the suppression of vice. That they had an indirect effect in keeping in restraint a certain unfortunate class of women was undoubted; but that was not the direct result. He was not going to argue the question whether the inhabitants of those towns had a right to claim protection or not. Possibly they had. But, if they had, then that protection ought to be given openly and directly. If, in consequence of the introduction of a large body of troops into these towns, it was the duty of the State to give some additional police protection to the localities, such additional protection ought to be provided for distinctly and openly. He believed that everything in the direction of public order and decency, which was claimed and which was desired by the inhabitants of these towns, might be given altogether apart from the operation of these particular Acts. He believed that the measure which was introduced in "another place"—whatever they might think of some of its provisions—would have enabled local authorities to preserve order much more effectually than any indirect action under the operation of these Acts. He wished to say 1271 that he regretted the Resolution which the House arrived at some time ago in regard to these Acts; but, at the same time, it was his business to lay as correct information as he could before the Committee, and there could be no good in exaggerating the consequence of what had recently taken place. He laid on the Table of the House the other day a Memorial which had been presented to the Prime Minister by the Secretary to the Association for promoting the extension of these Acts. In that Memorial, by some atrocious reasoning which he was unable to follow, it was alleged that the consequence of the suspension of compulsory examination had been that no women at all had voluntarily entered the hospitals since the suspension of the order. That was not the fact. There had been a considerable diminution, it was true; but there were now 130 women in hospitals, almost the whole of whom had gone in voluntarily. There were about half the number of women in hospital now that there were before the Act was passed, and it had always been found that a much larger number went into hospital voluntarily in the winter than in the summer. It was not the fact that the suspension of the order for the compulsory examination had made the Act totally inoperative. As to the effect upon the troops, anyone who had to study these figures at all must see that it was extremely difficult to follow these statistics, because there were alterations in the rates of these diseases which were beyond any calculation. The statement he had made, in answer to various Questions, was said to be extremely alarming. He must admit that the increase of disease had been somewhat remarkable. In the first place, as to the admission of troops suffering from these diseases into hospital, the comparison he had given in answer to a Question showed that, comparing the four weeks ending the 6th of July with the four weeks ending on the 4th of May, there had been an increase in the admissions into hospital from these diseases of 5.5 per 1,000. But then, during the same period, there had been an increase in the unprotected districts of 2.8 per 1,000, so that the increase attributable to the suspension of the compulsory examination might be set down at 2.7 per 1,000. Now, that increase in the average force in the protected 1272 districts represented an increase of admissions for what were set down as venereal sores and gonorrhœa, in the four weeks, of 109 men, or a total of 1,400 men a-year, out of a total force of 40,000 men; 1,400 represented the mere admissions into hospital of men suffering from these diseases, many of which were but of a slight character. They had no knowledge whatever of the cause of the increase of those remaining in hospital in the unprotected districts of 1.23 per 1,000, showing an increase attributable to the suspension of the Acts of 1.88 per 1,000. That increase represented, in the unprotected places, 76 men permanently in hospital. That was, no doubt, very deplorable; but a force of 76 men permanently in hospital was not a fact of that alarming character which it was represented to be by hon. Gentlemen opposite. Personally, he would rather extend than restrict the operation of these Acts; but he would admit that there was considerable difficulty in defending a system which could only be so partially applied as these Acts had been. He did not think it would be possible to accomplish any very striking result, where they could only work over so limited an area; and everyone admitted that, in the present state of public opinion, it would be absolutely impossible to dream of extending the area. Under those circumstances, the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Puleston) asked the Government what they proposed to do. He (the Marquess of Hartington) had nothing to add to what was stated by his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Sir William Harcourt), and by himself, in the discussion which arose two months ago, on the Motion for the Adjournment of the House, made by the hon. Gentleman himself. The Government had stated that, in their opinion, the effect of the Resolution which was passed at the beginning of the Session was conclusive, so far as the opinion of the House of Commons was concerned. They had pointed out that the operation of these Acts depended not only upon the use by the Government of their Executive powers, but also upon the will of the House. The hon. Member for Devon-port (Mr. Puleston) said it was ridiculous to allege that the assent of the House would not be given, and urged that a 1273 strong Government like the present would have no difficulty in carrying any Vote which it proposed to the House if it intended to introduce legislation. That was the hon. Member's opinion. It was not the opinion of the Government. The Government believed that the opinion of the House was conclusively expressed in the Vote that had been come to. They believed that after the passing of the Resolution proposed by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Halifax (Mr. Stansfeld), the majority of the House would not be willing to stultify itself by assenting readily to a Vote for the purpose of putting into operation and giving the assent of the House to the operation of the law which they had condemned. They thought, therefore, they had acted in the only way it was possible for them to act, looking at the opinion held by the majority of the House of Commons. They had laid on the Table Bills which they desired to pass for the repeal of these Acts, and for the substitution of other provisions for the maintenance of public peace and order. Circumstances had prevented progress being made with either of those Bills in that House. The Government had nothing more to add, except that they did not propose to ask the House, after the expression of opinion which had been given, to vote the sum necessary for putting into operation the compulsory examination of these women.
§ MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKsaid, he should be very sorry to allow one word to fall from him which should be, in the least degree, disagreeable to the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Hartington); but, at the same time, he must traverse the statement with which the noble Marquess commenced his observations. The noble Marquess said that the whole object of these Acts was simply to relieve the soldiers and sailors who were suffering from these diseases, and to add to the strength of Her Majesty's Forces, whether military or naval. He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) was a Member of that House, and attended all the debates which took place during the passing of these Acts. No doubt, only very short Reports were kept of the proceedings on those occasions; but he remembered that he based his support of these Acts not solely on the interests of the Army and Navy, but mainly 1274 for the relief of the suffering women who had been driven into the sad career of prostitution. Any hon. Gentleman who had taken the trouble to observe the course of examination which he (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) thought it his duty to pursue in the Committee which sat upon the Contagious Diseases Acts would see that his views were entirely in that direction. Therefore, not only was he justified in the remarks he made on a former occasion, but he would be still further justified in calling the attention of the Committee to what had happened since with regard to these unfortunate women. He had always felt it his duty to make a personal investigation of these subjects; and only last week, when he found himself at Canterbury, he made searching inquiries concerning the operation of these Acts. He ascertained that the universal opinion, whether it was Conservative, Ministerialist, or Radical, was that with regard to the condition of these unfortunate women, the Government had made a fatal mistake in the course they had pursued. It was, he thought, desirable that he should present some indisputable facts to the Committee. Here was one case which would illustrate the unfortunate results which were following on the action of the Government. In the month of June, a woman went into the City of Canterbury. She resided in the neighbourhood of the barrack, and there carried on the profession of a prostitute. [A laugh.] He did not think it was a laughing matter. It was, in his opinion, a matter rather for grief than laughter. Well, after a fortnight's time, this woman became so badly diseased that, being unable to continue her calling, she went to the workhouse as a pauper, and he would read to the Committee what had been written to him concerning her by an active Poor Law Guardian from Canterbury. He wrote—
The case I mentioned to you is as follows:—Sarah Goram, aged 17, was admitted at the Canterbury Union Workhouse at 8.40 P.M., on Saturday, June 2, and was taken to Mr. Barratt on Monday, 4th of June. She was in such a sadly diseased condition that Mr. Barrett telegraphed to the Police Inspector at Chatham, and he came down and took her to the Lock Hospital. This poor wretch was seen by Barratt some week or two before in the street, and advised by him to give up her trade and he would send her to the hospital. The effluvia from the poor girl in the Union and at Mr. Barratt's was dreadful. You have the partiticulars 1275 up to the 4th, and I have no doubt she can he followed on. As regards the propagation of disease, girls—mere children—are to he had in our streets by scores. They seem to be perfectly delighted that this is a "free country.This unfortunate girl was sent to the Lock Hospital at Chatham. He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) followed her there, and he had a letter from Miss Webb, a lady who was well known to hon. Members who sat on the Committee appointed to inquire into the operation of these Acts. Miss Webb confirmed the statements he had just quoted. She pointed out that this was only one instance out of the many, and added—I hope things will not remain like this till next Session. It will be terrible if they do.He gave Miss Webb's name because be was not in the least afraid of doing so, and he knew she was not afraid of her name being known. She gives a return on the 16th of August of the number of women in the Lock Hospital at Chatham. She says:—But of the hundreds on the streets in Chatham only three are in. The patients now presenting themselves are in such a state, I hear from the nurses, that they must have done an enormous amount of mischief, and will be a long time probably in hospital. It is a terrible prospect, that women in this condition are to be allowed in future to do as they please with regard to being cured.He would also read a paragraph from a letter written recently by Miss Webb to The United Service Gazette—The state of Chatham since the withdrawal of the Contagious Diseases Acts police is terrible, and becoming daily worse; the factory girls and others, who have hitherto been kept in check by their presence in town, are becoming rapidly demoralized; in fact, the young of both sexes are going fast to ruin, since where there is a great military centre vice is usually rampant, but while there was the protection of these police hundreds were deterred from entering on the downward course. The hospital, where we had, in the early days of the working of the Acts, 73 patients, at this time only has 11 patients, three of whom have been brought by their friends, and cannot be said to belong to the dangerous class, while the naval and military hospitals have a great number of patients in them, caused by this terrible malady. Ignorance is the main cause of the opposition to the Contagious Diseases Acts, I believe; and therefore the spread of knowledge on the subject, which is free from impurity, is essential.These allegations were entirely borne out by the statements made to him (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) in Canterbury last week; and if the noble Marquess would only read the evidence which was put before the Committee, 1276 he would find that the whole of the, order of the streets in these towns was maintained by the Metropolitan Police. ["No, no!"] An hon. Member dissented; but he (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) maintained the position he had taken up, and any hon. Member who chose to take the trouble to inquire into the facts would find that the local police had a great deal more to do than attend to these women; whereas the Metropolitan Police, who were drafted into the towns, having nothing else to do, did nothing else. That had been proved over and over again. He would cite a greater authority than he had hitherto done on this question, and one whose opinion must, he should think, have great weight with the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister, whom he was glad to see in his place, and with the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War. That authority was no less a person than the noble Earl the First Lord of the Admiralty (the Earl of Northbrook). He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) was in "another place" not long since, when he heard some observations made by the First Lord of the Admiralty, and he took note of them. The noble Earl said—For his own part, he was strongly in favour of the Acts, which he believed had done much good. Her Majesty's Government, however, felt it was undesirable, after the vote of the other House of Parliament, to continue to employ the Metropolitan Police in carrying out the compulsory clauses of these Acts; but the action of the Metropolitan Police had been most beneficial in keeping young girls off the streets, and in leading to their reclamation.Those were the observations of a Member of the Cabinet—a noble Earl who sat in the Cabinet with the right bon. Gentleman the Prime Minister and the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War. He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) really thought it was not necessary to go further, when he bad on his side such an authority as the First Lord of the Admiralty. Passing from these unfortunate results of the action of the Government—results which, he did not hesitate to say, were proved to demonstration to any reasonable mind—let them see why these Acts were, he would not say repealed, but suspended to all intents and purposes, after the period of 16 years and more, during which they had borne such beneficial results. The First Lord of the Admiralty and the noble Marquess the Secretary of State 1277 for War said that the House of Commons chose to pass this Resolution, and therefore they were bound to obey it, and to take the action which they had taken. He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) really did not know why that should be the case. Even that Session they had known Resolutions passed by a majority of the House, in regard to which the Government had, the very next day, tried to reverse the decision which the House of Commons had come to; and he should have thought they might have done something in the same direction in the case of a policy which had been carried out so successfully for 16 years. He had noticed with surprise certain remarks which were made by the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) had said that he knew nothing about these Acts; that they were passed sub silentio; and that, therefore, he knew nothing of them. [Mr. GLADSTONE: I never said anything of the sort.] The right hon. Gentleman had certainly stated that the Acts were passed so silently that he knew nothing about them. Now, however, he (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) came to the very important point of who was to blame. It was not the House of Commons. They all knew that, on the occasion when the recent Resolution was arrived at, there was what was called an arrangement made by the promoters of the ideas which had led to all this misery, this increase of disease, and this inefficiency of our soldiers and sailors. By that arrangement a Whip was made by the opponents of the Acts, and nothing was done on the other side. The result, therefore, was hardly surprising. The worst feature was that the Government never appeared to know their policy. He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) had served on the Committee with the right hon. Gentleman opposite (the Judge Advocate General), and within a few hours of the debate commencing he thought he should have had the whole strength of the Government on his side. To his utter astonishment, however, he found that right hon. Gentleman opposite rising in his place, and stating that he had no mandate from the Government to speak on the question. A very casual perusal of the Division List would show what the Government's intentions were in the matter. While only six Members of the Government 1278 voted in favour of the policy which they had maintained so successfully for years, there were 19 Members of the Government who voted or paired in favour of the Resolution of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Halifax (Mr. Stansfeld). He believed the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister paired on that occasion. He should like to ask, having some considerable experience in Parliament, what right the right hon. Gentleman had to pair on any great question of policy? Why was he not in his place? Why was he not present to say, as he had said on many other occasions, that he had changed his mind?
§ MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKWhy did he not then propose the repeal of the Acts?
§ MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKasked why the right hon. Gentleman did not propose the repeal of the Acts in 1880? The right hon. Gentleman had put matters in a ten times worse position by his interruptions. In 1880, when the right hon. Gentleman assumed the reins of power, he allowed these vicious and abominable Acts—as he professed to regard them—to continue. Certainly, under these circumstances, the right hon. Gentleman had to-night uttered his own sentence of condemnation, and he might repeat that if ever there was a place in that House where the word humiliations should be written, it was the seat then occupied by the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone). But he (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) was saying, when he was interrupted, that there were 19 Members of the Government who supported the Resolution of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Halifax; and, therefore, the mischief which had arisen was entirely of their making. It was quite clear that the Government had made up their minds that those Acts should be repealed; and the fault he found with them was that, instead of proposing their repeal straightforwardly, they brought about the result they desired by pairing, or by voting without speaking. He maintained that it was their duty to have come forward straightforwardly, and, rising in their places, to have said they agreed with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Halifax, and that he should have 1279 their support. He did not know why the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Sir William Harcourt) was not present when the vote was given. He should have thought that, inasmuch as the right hon. Gentleman really had the administration of the Department, and was the Chief of the policemen who had done all these beneficial acts, with whom no fault could be found whatever throughout the lengthened inquiry which had taken place, and against whom no case whatever had been made out, he would have been present to say a word in their favour. He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) found that the Representative of the Admiralty in that House (Mr. Campbell-Bannerman) was away, and that the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General (Sir Henry James) and the hon. Gentleman the Surveyor General of the Ordnance (Mr. Brand) were also absent. He could not, for a moment, believe that want of success of these Acts was the cause of that defection on the part of the Government. Numerous Petitions had been presented to the House, and he (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) would admit that there was a strong feeling against the Acts amongst a class of persons who were described, in a leading newspaper of that evening, as "crotcheteers and faddists"—a class of persons who regarded these terrible diseases as nothing more or less than God's punishment of wicked men. The persons by whom these unfortunate and superstitious opinions were held were very small in number. No doubt, they had certain influences at election times, and they never neglected an opportunity of waiting upon a candidate to ask him to vote for the repeal of these Acts. He himself had frequently been waited upon by these persons; but he had invariably resisted their advances; and if the Government had only been as firm in this matter as he and many others had been, and remained steadfast to their true opinions, they would not now find themselves in their present unfortunate position. After all, the opponents of these Acts were hardly trustworthy men or women. They did not depend upon facts for the position they took up; otherwise, they would not agitate all through the country unscrupulously telling terrible falsehoods. It was his duty, when he last addressed the House 1280 upon the point, to expose a certain statement made by one Wheeler, of Rochester, who was a witness before the Committee to which he had already referred. ["Oh, oh!"] The hon. and learned Member for Stockport (Mr. Hop-wood) said "Oh, oh!" He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) was glad of that, because it enabled him to challenge the statements of this Wheeler of Rochester, and to show, as he had done before, that his allegations were utterly devoid of truth. He should have thought nothing of this Mr. Wheeler, because he was only an obscure individual; but very lately a publication had been sent to several Members of that House, upon which he thought it his duty to comment. He considered it his duty to take that course, because this document emanated from persons whose condition of life and position in society was very much more important and more influential than that of this one Wheeler, of Rochester. There had been a pamphlet issued by a certain Society in the East of London, formed for the purpose of obtaining the repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts. He observed, with the greatest possible regret, that the Chairman of that Society was no less a person than the hon. Member for Bristol (Mr. S. Morley). The Vice Chairman was the hon. Gentleman the Member for Lambeth (Sir William M Arthur); and amongst the other names upon the pamphlet he found those of the hon. Member for Norwich (Mr. Colman), the hon. Member for Cambridge (Mr. W. Fowler), the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade (Mr. J. Holms), the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Stockport (Mr. Hopwood), the hon. Baronet the Member for Finsbury (Sir Andrew Lusk), the hon. Member for Leicester (Mr. P. A. Taylor), and the hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Waddy). It was necessary that the statements made in that pamphlet should receive contradiction in that House, otherwise they might produceill-effects—if, indeed, they had not already done so. He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) had himself more than once called the attention of the hon. Member for Bristol to the scandalous fabrications which were set forth in that publication. He wrote to the hon. Member last November concerning them, and the hon. Gentleman said he had not time to attend to the 1281 matter. Only yesterday, when he found the hon. Gentleman exerting himself to prevent cruelty to pigeons, he told him it would be far better if he would endeavour to prevent cruelty to women; and that whenever the matter came again before the House of Commons, he (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) should call attention to this pamphlet. The pamphlet contained the following statement:—
Who can wonder that women, driven to desperation, should have again and again terminated their lives, when confronted with such a tribunal, and that maidens, innocent of a knowledge of the very terms used for their entanglement, have been placed on the registers, deprived of their natural liberty, and subjected to the outrage perpetuated under the Acts? Cases have happened of girls, yet in their state of maidenhood, being subjected to the Acts on the oath of a police constable. I (Mr. C. J. Tarring, Barrister-at-Law, writing to The Protest, under date April 16th, 1878) am frequently informed of women being positively hunted about by the spy police; and being "deterred," not from entering upon, or pursuing, any evil calling, but from succeeding in their efforts to avoid or escape from it.' For, in all large towns, there is many a poor woman, shuddering on the brink of the abyss, to whom the suspicion of the policeman, followed by his prompt order to go up to the examination house,' is the last push which sends her over the edge. There are many, too, who have, alas succumbed in their hour of weakness to dire temptation, who yet are struggling to return to the path of honesty, but whoso struggles grow fainter under the leer of the detective, with his 'Come, now, you know you are no better than you ought to be,' and who receive the coup de grace from his short order to go up to the examination house, or it will be the worse for you.' It is not surprising that there are well-authenticated instances of women, in their wretchedness and despair, having sought relief even in death from the cruel persistence of their police tormentors. A girl of twenty, named Brown, drowned herself at Plymouth from this cause, in July, 1874, after a previous attempt to cut her throat. Another, named House, threw herself out of the window of the Royal Albert Hospital at Devonport, in May, 1869; and a third, named Mulcarty, who had only recently been married, drowned herself at Milbay, in April, 1873. And in the summer of 1876, the widow of an actor, named Percy, committed suicide at Alder-shot, after having written to the newspapers to complain of being prevented by the police from getting an honest living. And innocent maidens have been terrified into signing the disgraceful fraud called the voluntary submission' (by virtue of which they are straightway inscribed on the register of prostitutes, although there is not the faintest indication of such an effect in the paper itself), and compelled to undergo the degrading consequences, without having had the slightest idea what they were entrapped into. How much is there behind and beneath what is known of this kind that never comes to light; for the class to which these women belong 1282 does not find a very ready access to the public ear with their tale of wrong. In April, 1881, a girl of the name of Elizabeth Burley was chased through the streets of Dover by the spy police, and actually threw herself into the harbour to escape from their clutches.He (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) thought it right to say that all these allegations—he did not scruple to use the phrase—were entirely false. [The JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL: Hear, hear!] He was glad that the right bon. Gentleman confirmed that statement. Almost all these cases were brought before the Committee, but they broke down without exception. Every case that it was thought might have a chance of establishing a charge against the police was brought before the Committee. The cases were thoroughly investigated by the Committee, and they were all entirely disproved. There, in his place in Parliament, he did protest against these statements being made. Under such circumstances—["Divide, divide!"] He was not at all surprised that some hon. Members cried "Divide!" He would repeat that, in his place in Parliament, he protested against these statements being made; and he wished to express his regret and grief that Members of Parliament, so distinguished and so respected in their several positions as the hon. Members he had enumerated, should allow such a foul and discreditable and disreputable document to be issued under their names. He did not intend to mince matters. He had strong opinions on these points; and he thought it most deplorable that Her Majesty's Government should have allowed themselves, for one moment, to give way to pressure of this sort, and, practically, to condemn the Acts which he knew were supported by the vast majority of the intelligent people of the country—by all reasonable men, by all those who had really investigated the subject thoroughly, and certainly by the vast majority not only of the Medical Profession, but of the Learned Professions. He was very sorry that he had been called upon to hear the statements which had been made by the noble Marquess that night. He had been in hopes that there might have been some signs of repentance exhibited by him, and that the Government might have resolved not to leave our soldiers and sailors unnecessarily open to the ravages of this terrible disease—although that 1283 was the least important element in the case—and that they would have done something to alleviate the sufferings of those unfortunate women whose miserable lot, as they saw it when passing through the streets, was one which touched them to the very soul. He had felt it his duty to make these observations; and, certainly, if there was a chance of giving another vote, he should give one in favour of the continuance of these Acts.
§ MR. BULWER, who rose exactly at midnight, said, he did not intend to detain the Committee long. [Cries of"Sunday!"] He was not going to say anything, although the subject was not a savoury one, which would be at all unbefitting for a Sunday. He had been a Member, during two Parliaments, of the Committee which was appointed to inquire into the working of the Contagious Diseases Acts. He joined the Committee originally with rather a prejudice against the Acts; but he had not served very long before he ascertained what was the nature of the opposition that was made to them. He found that the opponents to the Acts were concerned less about arriving at the truth than establishing a foregone conclusion, and that the opposition was based mainly upon what was, in his opinion, a mass of falsehood. Figures were produced which, of course, dexterously manipulated, might prove a great deal, or might prove nothing; and he found that almost all the cases which were brought against the Acts, the so-called instances of mal-administration and of injustice, had absolutely no foundation whatever. He found that Petitions were got up against the Acts in a manner which certainly reflected no credit on those who had charge of them, and that these Petitions were signed by ignorant persons who knew nothing whatever about the circumstances. He had no hesitation, therefore, although he had voted on some questions against those who supported the Acts, in agreeing to the admirable Report which was drawn up by the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Limerick (Mr. O'Shaughnessy), who so ably presided over the Committee. He must express his regret that, by the Resolution of the House, the Acts had been virtually repealed, because he could not fail to see that the operation of the Acts had been most beneficial. It was 1284 clear that, without compulsory powers, the benefit of the Acts would be almost entirely gone. The noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War (the Marquess of Hartington) spoke of the number of women who had been brought into hospital. What he (Mr. Bulwer) wanted to know was, whether the women would be kept in hospital until they were cured?
§ MR. BULWERsaid, he was glad to hear it, as he had thought that they would be at liberty to leave the hospital when they pleased. Undoubtedly, the number of women who now entered the hospitals was much smaller than the number who entered in a diseased condition under the Compulsory Clauses of the Acts. He extremely regretted the action of the Government in stopping the operation of these Acts, which, in his opinion, had done an infinity of good. There had been a good deal of misrepresentation; but the Acts had received the approval of most persons conversant with the facts and competent to form a just opinion. He had had conversations forced upon him by women on this subject; but he had told them that the subject was one he could not discuss with them, because they did not understand it. The opposition to the Acts was mainly fostered by means of falsehood and exaggerated statements told to women to excite their feelings, and to prejudice them against the Acts. At that late hour of the night, however, he would not detain the Committee further.
§ SIR JOHN HAYI rise to move, Mr. Chairman, that you do now report Progress, and ask leave to sit again.
§ Sir ALEXANDER GORDON and Sir JOHN HAY rising together,
§ THE CHAIRMAN (Mr. COURTNEY)called upon Sir ALEXANDER GORDON.
§ SIR ALEXANDER GORDONIt has occurred to me, in listening to this debate——
§ SIR JOHN HAYI rise to Order. I moved, Mr. Chairman, that you do now report Progress, and ask leave to sit again.
§ THE CHAIRMAN (Mr. COURTNEY)The hon. and gallant Gentleman (Sir Alexander Gordon) rose before the right hon. and gallant Gentleman 1285 the Member for Wigtown (Sir John Hay).
§ SIR ALEXANDER GORDONsaid, it seemed to be considered by hon. Gentlemen who had spoken on the subject, that the withdrawal of the police from the towns in which they had been employed was a necessary consequence of the Vote passed by this House. It must be remembered that on the withdrawal of the Metropolitan Police from the towns in question, those towns became subject to increased expenditure, inasmuch as they had now to provide their own police. The great desire of these towns was to get back the Metropolitan Police, and he regretted very much that the Bill brought in by the Government was not persevered in, although there were one or two clauses in it which, to his mind, were objectionable. The measure, however, on the whole, was framed in a very desirable manner, and might have done great benefit if it had passed into law. He could not help thinking that the Government acted rather in a hurry; for, on the very day following that on which the Resolution was passed, they gave orders for the withdrawal of the Metropolitan Police. He hoped the Government would, next Session, bring in the Bill which they had been obliged to drop, because he was quite sure that something in that direction was very desirable.
§ SIR JOHN HAYsaid, it was now 10 minutes past 12 on Sunday morning. The House had been sitting for 12 hours, and, of course, if there was any chance of completing the Army and Navy Estimates before 8 in the morning, or within a reasonable time, he should not think of interrupting the proceedings. ["Hear, hear!"] He could not speak for the Army Votes. He did not know how much discussion there was to be upon those Votes; but he should imagine that, upon the subject to be raised by his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Horsham (Sir Henry Fletcher), there was every likelihood of a considerably long debate. After the Army Estimates, it was intended to enter on an important discussion to be raised by his hon. and gallant Friend (Captain Maxwell-Heron) on the Court Martial Vote. There were also the Greenwich Hospital Vote and other Naval Votes, which would require some consideration. After sitting for 12 hours, it was utterly impossible to sit for six or eight more; and 1286 he therefore moved that the Chairman report Progress. ["Oh, oh!" and "Hear, hear!"]
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Sir John Say.)
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he should have thought that the right hon. and gallant Gentleman (Sir John Hay) would have seen the wisdom of finishing the Vote they had now in hand, and that the Committee would not think of reporting Progress until that Vote was disposed of. He hoped, however, that when the Vote was disposed of, the Committee would take seriously into view the present state of affairs. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman might be better acquainted with the case than he (Mr. Gladstone) was; but he was under the impression that there were no Votes remaining which would occupy any considerable time in discussion. Certainly, the question to be raised by the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Captain Maxwell-Heron) was one of a personal nature, and the discussion arising upon it must, therefore, be limited. He hoped the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Wigtown would allow the Committee to take the present Vote before he made the Motion to report Progress.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, he should be compelled to follow the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Wigtown (Sir John Hay) into the Lobby, if he pressed his Motion to a Division. He should do so on the ground that it was now Sunday morning. It seemed to him (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) a most unseemly proceeding on the part of the House of Commons and the Government, for the sake of curtailing the Session by, possibly, a day, or half-a-day, that they should be sitting into Sunday morning in order to pass Votes in Supply. It must be remembered that they had been sitting until 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning for the past week. Hon. Members were thoroughly exhausted, and when it came to repeating the same process on a Sunday morning he thought it time to enter some very serious protest. On that ground, he should support the right hon. and gallant Gentleman in his Motion to report Progress.
§ MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, he could not wonder that his right hon. and gallant Friend (Sir John Hay) had made that Motion, especially having regard to the disorderly interruptions which emanated from certain quarters opposite. In common candour, he could not help remarking that the disturbance was not discountenanced in certain quarters of the Treasury Bench. [Mr. GLADSTONE: Oh, oh!] As the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister challenged him, he would repeat the statement. In certain quarters of the Treasury Bench——
§ THE CHAIRMAN (Mr. COURTNEY)The right hon. Gentleman must address himself to the Question of reporting Progress.
§ MR. J. LOWTHERThat was exactly what I was doing, although, Sir, in consequence of the disorderly interruptions of the Prime Minister, you were prevented from hearing what I had to say.
MR. GLADSTONEI wish to know, Sir, whether it is competent for the right hon. Gentleman, who has been called to Order, to allege that the Chairman of Committees did not hear what he had to say?
§ THE CHAIRMAN (Mr. COURTNEY)I beg the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. J. Lowther) to keep to the Question before the Committee.
§ MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, he would at once bow to the Chairman's ruling; but he thought he was justified in saying that the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister most unnecessarily interrupted him. He was saying that interruptions emanated from certain quarters of the Treasury Bench, and he gave that as a reason why his right hon. and gallant Friend (Sir John Hay) should move to report Progress.
§ THE CHAIRMAN (Mr. COURTNEY)I must ask the right hon. Gentleman to remember that, under the New Rules, he must confine his remarks to the Motion to report Progress.
§ MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, he should be strictly within those limits if he confined himself to entering an emphatic protest against the money of the taxpayers of the country being voted away in a thin House upon a Sunday morning, amidst disorderly interruptions initiated upon the Treasury Bench and participated in by the Prime Minister himself.
§ SIR JOHN HAYsaid, he thought there was good reason for reporting Progress when the right hon. and 1288 learned Gentleman the Member for Whitehaven (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) had been interrupted in a disorderly manner from one quarter of the Treasury Bench. The discussion which had taken place, and the way in which Business was being interrupted by the Prime Minister, were a sufficient reason why, on Sunday morning, a protest should be made against the money of the taxpayers being voted amidst interruptions of a disorderly character, initiated in many cases by the Treasury Bench and defended by the Prime Minister himself.
§ MR. SHEILsaid, he understood that the Motion to report Progress was made on the ground that it was now Sunday morning. Sometimes he had heard it said—"The better the day the better the deed;" and he would remind the Committee that, on a former occasion, when Progress was moved upon the Coercion Bill, after most of the Irish Members had been expelled, the right hon. Gentleman who now moved to report Progress (Sir John Hay) said he was quite ready to go on through Sunday, because the Battle of Waterloo was fought on a Sunday. That reason still held good, and he (Mr. Sheil) thought the Committee might go on with this matter for a certain time; but he wished to ask the Prime Minister, whether, if further Progress was made with Supply, he would undertake to then report Progress in order that the Tramways and Public Companies (Ireland) Bill might be taken.
CAPTAIN MAXWELL-HERONsaid, he did not think the Motion he wished to make would be a question of a few minutes, as the Prime Minister supposed. His Motion had reference to a gallant officer, a brother of his; this was the third time he had been prevented from bringing on that Motion, and he was now naturally anxious to put it off to a better opportunity, as it was absolutely necessary that the discussion should be reported. He hoped the Prime Minister would take his position into consideration.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he would suggest that the present Vote should be taken, and then Progress might be reported.
§ MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, he thought that a reasonable proposal, and hoped his right hon. and gallant Friend (Sir John Hay) would agree to it.
§ SIR JOHN HAYsaid, he wished to say, in reply to the appeal of the Prime Minister, that the present Vote might, he thought, fairly be finished; but there was another subject under these Estimates which his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Horsham (Sir Henry Fletcher) had to raise, and it would be very inconvenient to proceed with that under this Vote. He was willing to withdraw his Motion on the understanding suggested.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 15; Noes 42: Majority 27.—(Div. List, No. 303.)
§ Original Question again proposed.
§ MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, the Prime Minister had very truly stated, the other day, in reply to the hon. Member for Mid Lincolnshire (Mr. Chaplin), that it was beyond the competency of any House of Parliament to interfere with the Statute Law of the land. That was a very sound Constitutional doctrine; but, in this case, the right hon. Gentleman had adopted a line of action precisely the opposite of what he had so soundly inculcated. He had, in effect, said this—that although the Statute Law of the land provided that certain steps should be taken, and because one branch of the Legislature had expressed a different opinion, therefore the Government would adopt a line of action in opposition to that which was contained in the law of the land. The right hon. Gentleman had supplied some clue to what was previously a mystery. His right hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven (Mr. Cavendish Bentinck) had said that the right hon. Gentleman had, on a previous occasion, stated that these Acts were passed sub sílentio, without his being aware that they were enacted. The right hon. Gentleman, with promptitude, contradicted that statement; and when the right hon. the Member for Whitehaven went on to show that the Prime Minister had on that, as on many other questions, changed his mind, the Prime Minister again interrupted him, and said he had not changed his mind. What did that mean? That the Prime Minister, who, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, and a Member of the Cabinet, was primarily responsible for the introduction of these Acts, contrary to his own opinion, and who was more or less—and he feared 1290 more rather than less—during the time in which the Acts had been in operation, responsible for carrying them out,; also against his own opinion—the right hon. Gentleman having found that the majority of the House was prepared to run counter to Acts of Parliament for which he had originally been responsible, and which he had carried out for many years, now laid down, with regard to those Acts, an entirely different line of action to that which he had laid down with regard to the Cattle Diseases Acts a few days ago. The right hon. Gentleman had, to his own satisfaction, convinced himself that he was perfectly right in assenting, originally, to the Acts which were passed contrary to his own judgment, and which he had carried out without saying a word that would lead anyone to believe that he was the unwilling instrument in carrying them out; and he now appeared to think he was justified in coming down and saying he never approved of the Acts. ["Oh, oh!"] [Mr. GLADSTONE: I did not say that.] He understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that he had not changed his mind; but, apparently, he had misunderstood him, and he would allow the right hon. Gentleman to explain, if the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General would allow the debate to proceed without unseemly interruptions; and it was to the hon. and learned Attorney General, and not, as had been erroneously supposed, to the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Judge Advocate General (Mr. Osborne Morgan), to whom he had previously referred as having interrupted the discussion.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, that, earlier in the Sitting, the Chairman had decided that the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar) was out of Order in saying "Hear, hear!" when the Prime Minister was speaking. He wished to know whether a similar, or even a worse, interruption from the Treasury Bench was not also out of Order?
§ THE CHAIRMANThe interruption by the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar) was very peculiar, and it seemed to me to be of a very unseemly character. I am not prepared to say whether the interruptions now are directly in Order; but they certainly are not of an unseemly character.
§ MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, he did not suppose that the hon. and learned Attorney General intended any personal 1291 discourtesy; but he (Mr. J. Lowther) did think the debate might be allowed to proceed in some sort of Order. As to the question he had been discussing, he thought the country had a right to demand one of two things—either that the Executive should carry out the law as it stood, or endeavour to amend it. What said the Secretary of State for the Home Department on the subject the other day? The right hon. Gentleman, he believed, was perfectly sound on the subject, and being asked a Question as to the employment of the local police to carry out the Acts, he said, most distinctly, that he had no control over those police; and that, if the local authorities wished to carry out the Statute Law of the land, they had the law in their own hands, and that it was in their power, by means of their own local police, to carry out the Acts in as efficient a manner as had previously been done by the Metropolitan Police. A similar Question was subsequently put to the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary, and he seized that occasion to modify what he had distinctly stated, and intimated that that was a difficult point, upon which he should like to have Notice, and the subject was dropped; but he thought the Committee had a right to ask this. Assuming that the Prime Minister succeeded in what he was apparently determined to do—namely, to pass this Vote, without the necessary quota, enabling the Acts to be carried out in the former fashion—did the Secretary of State for the Home Department adhere to his opinion, that the local authorities had power to carry out the Acts in their integrity, without recourse to Imperial Funds? That was a point which, he thought, ought to be cleared up, even assuming that the Acts could be efficiently carried out. He was glad the Prime Minister was intending to reply, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would, in addition to being short—which the right hon. Gentleman intimated he intended to be—be also precise, and would inform the House of what they had a right to ask—whether the local authorities had the power under the law of the land to carry out the Acts, without the intervention of the Metropolitan Police? If they had that power, that would go a long way in mitigation of the action of the Government; but unless that was made perfectly clear, he 1292 thought he had a right to ask the Government whether they considered themselves justified in allowing the law of the land to be practically set aside through their own neglect?
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, the speech of the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. J. Lowther) was, no doubt, of interest to him, and if he could concur in the right hon. Gentleman's opinion, he should make no scruple in following him. But he did not see any interest so great as the right hon. Gentleman attached to his speech; and there was not a single proposition which had been delivered by the right hon. Gentleman that was accurate, and the consequence of his going into details was that the aggregate result was entirely false. There was one charge which he took to be serious. The right hon. Gentleman said that, having laid down the principle that the law of the land was superior to a Resolution of Parliament, he (Mr. Gladstone) had now departed from that principle in regard to these Acts. The doctrine of the right hon. Gentleman was, that when an Act of Parliament was passed it was the duty of the Government, under all circumstances, to provide the sums required, and that it was the absolute duty of the House of Commons to vote them.
§ MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, the Government were bound to propose the Votes necessary for carrying out the law.
MR. GLADSTONEWhere does the right hon. Gentleman find that? In what Parliamentary commentaries, or law?
§ MR. CALLANCommon sense.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he would leave the question of common sense to the judgment of the hon. Gentleman who was so distinguished for it. The House of Commons was under no obligation to vote money; and when the Government had the most conclusive reason to know that the House of Commons would not vote the money, they were under no obligation to propose it.
§ MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKsaid, that he had stated in the course of his speech that the Prime Minister had said he had no knowledge of the passing of these Acts. The right hon. Gentleman had to his (Mr. Bentinck's) great surprise denied that; for on referring to a speech made by the right hon. Gentleman on the 7th of May last on a Motion for Adjournment, he found that the right hon. Gentleman had said— 1293
He was a Member of the Government at the time the Acts were passed; but he did not know how they passed, or by whom they were earned through the House;and he (Mr. Bentinck) would further remind the Prime Minister that he was then Chancellor of the Exchequer, and that the Estimates for the Acts must have been approved by him.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, that what he had stated was, that the Acts were passed in general obscurity, and were never brought before the Government.
§ MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that the right hon. Gentleman was charging his own Colleagues.
MR. GLADSTONEasked whether that frivolous discussion was to proceed simply in order to make him occupy the time of the House? What he had stated was, that the Acts were withdrawn from general notice, simply with the most honourable motives; but it was a great misfortune in reference to the policy of the Acts, because the country became committed to most important principles.
§ COLONEL ALEXANDERsaid, he would suggest that the Committee should now allow every Vote to pass without discussion, and that everything should be allowed to be discussed on the Report of Supply, which must be taken as the First Order on Monday, in order that the Appropriation Bill should be brought in. The debate on the Clyde Court Martial would occupy at least two hours.
§ MR. CALLANsaid, this was the Vote for Miscellaneous Charges at the War Office, and it would be in the recollection of the Committee that, towards the end of July, the hon. Member for Oxfordshire asked the Secretary of State for War why the evidence of the Departmental Committee had not been printed, as well as the evidence before the Departmental Committee as to the out-pensioners of Chelsea and Kilmainham Hospitals. The noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War replied that the reason was the expense of printing this evidence; and a few days later, he (Mr. Callan) himself asked a Question on the same subject, the answer to which was not given in any newspaper. If it had been given in one paper and not in any other, that would have been a mere accident; but it was a most extraordinary coincidence that both the Question and the answer were suppressed in every paper. It was now nearly the end of August, 1294 and no Member could get a copy of that evidence. If the evidence was not circulated, it should, at least, be left at the Vote Office for those who might require a copy; but, up to the present time, when the Army Estimates were being taken, it had been carefully suppressed. It was, as he had said, a most extraordinary fact, that no hon. Member could get a copy of the evidence to connote or comment upon. And, now, hon. Members were detained in the House, and taking part in that discreditable proceeding, a Sitting on Sunday morning. Fifteen years had he been a Member of the House, and only once before, during that time, had the House sat for a few minutes into Sunday. On that occasion, it was to pass a Coercion Bill; and, on that occasion, he spoke of the discredit of such a proceeding. How a Member for Mid Lothian, a Sabbatarian constituency, could be in the House, and lend himself to such a breach of Sabbatarian institutions, he could not understand.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he would trespass on the time of the Committee for a moment, to refer to what had been said by the hon. and gallant Member for South Ayrshire (Colonel Alexander), who suggested that the Votes should be taken in Committee; and, in order that a day might not be lost, the discussion should be taken on the Report stage. For that suggestion, he had to thank the hon. and gallant Member; and, in proposing to adopt it, he hoped the Votes would be taken now in their usual course, the Report being taken at the usual hour on Monday. His opinion was that this arrangement would be advantageous.
SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, he had a matter to bring forward in connection with the Vote quite distinct from that on which the Committee were engaged.
SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, he did not think that would be so convenient. It was not often he interposed in the proceedings; but the matter to which he wished to refer was a soldier's question. In connection with this Vote, he wished to ask the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War a question about the distribution of medals. This year £600 was devoted to the purpose, and last year £850, and he wished to bring before the Committee the claims, 1295 under this head, of certain men who held beleaguered garrisons during the Transvaal Campaign. In April last, he asked a Question on the subject of the noble Marquess, and the answer he received was unsatisfactory, and he thereupon intimated he would bring the matter forward on the first opportunity. There was some misunderstanding, if the noble Marquess would allow him to say so, in the answer he gave. His words were that the rewards given were one C.B., six Victoria Crosses, and six Distinguished Conduct Medals. Now, he (Sir Henry Fletcher) could not discover that this number of crosses and medals had been distributed, and he fancied there had been some misunderstanding between the Transvaal Campaign and other South African services. He wished to point out that the beleaguered garrisons in the Transvaal who, for three months, held Pretoria, Potchefstroom, Standerton, and other towns, did most honourably, most nobly, do their duty; and Sir Evelyn Wood, when he visited these garrisons, when peace was concluded, promised most distinctly, to the troops who had held these posts, that he would use his best endeavours that decorations should be given for their gallant conduct. These troops did most gallantly hold the forts for three months; they received no decorations; they had not even received a General Order, thanking them for their services, which they ought to have had after having from Sir Evelyn Wood a promise of a recognition of their services. Colonel Bellairs received a K.C.M.G., and one or two other officers, who held subordinate posts under his command, were rewarded with the honourable distinction of Aides-de-Camp to Her Majesty. Other officers received brevet rank, and Colonel Montague, of the 94th, the 2nd Battalion of the Connaught Rangers, received a C.B.; but, with these exceptions, no decorations had been bestowed on officers and men, beyond those Victoria Crosses and Distinguished Conduct Medals referred to by the noble Marquess, for services rendered to Queen and country. He might be told that it was in consequence of the campaign not having been successful, that no decorations could be given; but he maintained that these forces in the Transvaal were entirely separate from the forces in Natal during the unfortunate incident at Majuba Hill. They had nothing to do with the 1296 forcesin Natal, and for three months they were cut off from communication with them; they held their own during that time, and at the end of those three months they delivered up the beleagured towns in the same state in which they undertook the defence of them. He brought this matter forward simply, as an old soldier, for the purpose of expressing a hope that the Government would make some recognition of these services, because there was no doubt the treatment these troops had received had in some sort interfered with recruiting for Her Majesty's Army. There was a precedent for what he proposed in the case of Sir Frederick Roberts' march from Cabul to Candahar; decorations were given to those who took part in that march; and he trusted Her Majesty's Government would bestow some decoration on these gallant men who held out in these garrisons, and suffered great necessities, and received nothing in return. In the Egyptian Campaign "batta" was given to the troops; but, in the Transvaal, nothing was given, though, in many instances, the men lost all their clothing.
§ SIR JOHN HAYsaid, as to the influence upon recruiting, spoken of by his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir Henry Fletcher) in connection with this subject, he could speak from his own knowledge of a similar feeling among his own countrymen in Wigtonshire and Ayrshire, and that great dissatisfaction had arisen from the fact that no recognition of the services of these troops had been shown to any person but the Colonel, and none to the subordinate officers and rank and file for 99 days' service under fire. No more grand deed of arms was ever performed by officers and men of the British Army. Under fire, they had to raise defences for the protection of women and children who had taken refuge with them, having to expose themselves to all danger, because the only shelter possible to even the wounded men was given up to the women who had taken shelter in a small fort. Their exertions and their sufferings deserved the recognition of the country. As he had said, with regard to the effect on recruiting, he could confirm his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Horsham as to the effect in Ayrshire and Wigtonshire, caused by the neglect of the battalion of Royal Scotch Fusiliers, after going 1297 through a heroic defence which ought to be recognized as most brilliant service.
§ COLONEL ALEXANDERsaid, he should like, as Member for South Ayrshire, being the county with which the regiment concerned was most connected, to say a few words in support of the appeal of the hon. and gallant Member for Horsham (Sir Henry Fletcher). His right hon. and gallant Friend (Sir John Hay) had mentioned the presence of women during the siege, and, of course, that added greatly to the responsibility of officers and men. The ladies were for 97 days confined to a small space which they could not leave, one woman was wounded, and another succumbed to typhoid fever. After a siege of 97 days, under the pressure of exhaustion of provisions, and being obliged to abandon all hope of succour, they accepted, not the terms first proposed by the Boers, but honourable terms, such as might be accepted without question. They marched out with all the honours of war, being allowed to retain their side arms, and the men their property. Seventy-seven men were hilled and wounded, out of a small force of 213 men. He would ask the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War, could he not bestow some small decoration—it would cost almost nothing—on these gallant men? Rewards and decorations had been showered down rather freely of late; but not even a small bit of ribbon was given to these gallant men. He could assure the noble Marquess they would remember with gratitude any small cross or medal that might be bestowed. It had been said the defence was unsuccessful, because Potchefstroom surrendered. He denied that altogether; because it was found out afterwards that it ought not to have been surrendered, and the capitulation was annulled subsequently. No doubt, if the troops at Majuba had succeeded, they would have had medals, and those who fought at Potchefstroom would have have had a clasp; why, then, should they suffer from the fault of the Commander at Majuba? The feeling of these men was that attributed to an illustrious King of England—
By Jove, I am not covetous of gold;But if it be a sin to covet honour,I am the most offending soul alive.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he regretted extremely that the hon. 1298 Member for Louth (Mr. Callan) had found any difficulty in regard to the Kilmainham and Chelsea Hospital Papers. He had given instructions, and did not understand why they had not all been given. He had never understood that the Papers were to be circulated; but they were to be placed in the Library, and he was informed that had been done. Certainly, he had taken no measures to suppress them.
§ MR. CALLANsaid, he never meant to attribute anything of that kind.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he thought it was extremely probable the same fate would overtake the conversation which had taken place now as had befallen the Question and answer the hon. Member had referred to. With regard to the point raised by the hon. and gallant Member for Horsham (Sir Henry Fletcher), it had reference to a subject which was brought forward last year, and a Question on the subject was put to his Predecessor in Office (Mr. Childers). His right hon. Friend gave the reasons why the military authorities did not consider it desirable to distribute medals for the gallant services of the troops in that campaign. No action was taken in regard to that answer last Session, and he must tell the Committee that there must be some finality in decisions of this kind; and he did not think it would be for the best interests of the Army that another decision should be arrived at in the following year. It had been said that medals might be granted to the troops who garrisoned these towns, though it was quite unnecessary to give them to the troops who had taken part in the less fortunate engagement. But that, he thought, would be most unfair. He did not think that medals should be given for one part of military operations only; it would be casting a stigma upon men engaged in another part of the operations, because they were unsuccessful. The hon. and gallant Member for Horsham said he could not trace out the number of decorations which had been said to have been given for services in the Transvaal; but the hon. and gallant Member could hardly expect that he should give a long list of men. He could only give the information with which he had been supplied by the military authorities, and the War Office had every reason to suppose it was accurate. the War Office fully acknowledged 1299 the very gallant defence made by these garrisons; and, while it would have given him great pleasure to reward these gallant men, he did not think it was possible for him to re-open the question decided last year by the military authorities and by his right hon. Friend.
SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, he had asked a Question on the subject this Session; but he did not refer to it last year.
§ COLONEL ALEXANDERsaid, he ought to have said that the surrender of Potchefstroom was obtained under false pretences; and, as that was so, the capitulation was subsequently annulled; therefore, it could not be said the defence was unsuccessful.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, it was now proposed to take the Vote closing the Votes for the Effective Services, and then the Non-Effective Votes; and that any discussion proposed in reference to the Non-Effective Services, and to the remaining Naval Votes, should be postponed to the stage of Report. In the present condition in which the House found itself, and the languid mood of the Committee, any proposal to relieve them would be willingly accepted, and he would not do more than enter his emphatic protest against the management. He had anticipated the reception the proposal would meet with from Her Majesty's Government; and, naturally, the Prime Minister rose to accept with alacrity what he (Mr. O'Connor) conceived to be an extremely mischievous proposal. He would not invoke the shadow of Joseph Hume, or the Constitutional spirit of Sir Robert Peel; or ask, what Benjamin Disraeli would have had to say to this—one of the most mischievous precedents that could be established in the House of Commons. Why was it that the House made arrangements for the discussion of Votes in Committee, where each Member was allowed to speak several times over to make his statements clear? Simply, because it was absolutely necessary for some such arrangement to be made for the support of the very foundations of public liberty—the control by the House of the public purse. It was now proposed to take a whole bushel of Votes, to pass them in a formal manner, 1300 arranging for discussion upon a stage utterly unsuited for the subject-matter of the Votes. He did not think it necessary to make any prolonged opposition to the arrangement, under the circumstances; but he rose in order to be able hereafter to say that, when it was attempted to establish so mischievous a precedent, one Member of the House protested against it.
§ MR. WARTONsaid, there was another Member who joined in the protest just made. Next Session a still more crowded list of Orders might be expected, with the Government insisting upon having them passed anyhow, to meet the date for Prorogation, or, possibly, Dissolution. This new practice, as regarded the Estimates, was utterly unconstitutional. That Parliament would go down to posterity as the most selfish Parliament that ever sat; a Parliament which, in order that its Members might get away to their sports and pastimes, scamped the Business of the Session. Last October the promise from the Prime Minister was that additional facilities would be given to Supply, and the Government were allowed to go into Committee on Mondays and Thursdays, without preliminary discussion; but the proceedings of that night were the result of those pledges.
§ MR. TOMLINSONsaid, he also supported the protest against the deliberate abandonment of control over the voting of public money, simply because the Prime Minister wished the Session to terminate on a particular day. He should not like his constituents to think that he lightly regarded the duty devolving upon that House of guarding the Public Expenditure.
§ Original Question put, and agreed to.
§ (14.) £22,800, Rewards for Distinguished Services.
§ (15.) £80,000, Half Pay.
SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, he understood the Committee would not proceed with Votes upon which discussion would arise. He had a question to raise in connection with this one.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, the arrangement which had been accepted was to run through the Estimates, taking the remaining Votes without discussion; and it was against this arrangement that the three hon. Members who had just spoken had made 1301 their protest. The understanding, which he understood to be universally accepted, was that all discussion should be taken on the Report.
§ COLONEL NOLANsaid, he was going to say a few words on Vote 23, in reference to a case about which he had made repeated applications to the War Office.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (16.) £1,134,000, Retired Pay, &c.
§ (17.) £118,200, Widow's Pensions, &c.
§ (18.) £16,000, Pensions for Wounds.
§ (19.) £32,900, Chelsea and Kilmainham Hospitals.
§ (20.) £1,269,900, Out-Pensions.
§ (21.) £195,000, Superannuation Alowances.
§ (22.) £48,000, Retired Allowances, &c. to Officers of the Militia, Yeomanry Cavalry, and Volunteer Forces.
§ (23.) £1,230,000, Army (Indian Home Charges).
§ COLONEL NOLANsaid, he had, in reference to a particular case, been three or four times to the Pension Office and the War Office, and would take that opportunity of bringing it to the attention of the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War. It was the case of a man who belonged to his (Colonel Nolan's) late regiment, the Royal Artillery, and he was a native of Galway; so he was doubly interested in the case. The facts, as he had often stated them at the War Office, were simply these. The man enlisted in the Indian Army, on the condition that he should receive 1s. a-day pension after 21 years' service; he served through two or three campaigns, and had received two war medals; and except that, shortly before his discharge, there was a case of drunkenness against him, his conduct was good. He was discharged for varicose veins some 21 days, or three weeks, before his full time expired, and thus he was pensioned at 9d. a-day instead of 1s. That, he (Colonel Nolan) could not help regarding as a gross breach of contract. He had tested all the facts, and made repeated application to the War Office; but the War Office did not seem to understand the rules under which the man joined. Would the noble Marquess take note of the facts, for the 1302 man certainly ought to get his 1s. a-day?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he had some sort of recollection of the case; but, of course, without refreshing his memory, he could not go into it. He would venture to point out, but he was not certain, that this might be a case which would come under the change recommended by the Committee on Kilmainham Hospital, and which was proposed to be carried out by the Bill before the House the other day. Under the present law, the Secretary of State for War was not the interpreter of his own Warrant as regarded pensions; the Chelsea Commissioners had the power, under Statute, to interpret the Warrant; and there had been instances occasionally in which the Commissioners had insisted on an interpretation that the Secretary of State thought extremely hard and injurious to the soldier. It had been considered better that this power should not be in the hands of an irresponsible party. But he would make inquiries into the case.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (24.) £60,600, Medicines and Medical Stores, &c.
§ (25.) £10,400, Martial Law, &c.
§ (26.) £154,332, Greenwich Hospital and School.
§ House resumed.
§ Resolutions to be reported upon Monday next.