§ DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid)had the following Question on the Paper:—To ask the Secretary of State for War, Whether the Royal Warrant of November, 1879, which gave officers of the Army Medical Staff the right to retire after 20 years' service, is about to be interfered with or set aside; whether the condition of retirement was intended as an inducement to medical men to enter the Service; and, whether this provision under the said Warrant, if interfered with, will affect the retirement of those medical officers who entered the Service since the Warrant was issued?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. E. STANHOPE) (Lincolnshire, Horncastle)This Question has been on the Paper for four days, and, perhaps, I may be 459 allowed to answer it. It is not intended to prevent medical officers from retiring after 20 years' service; but it is proposed to require a reasonable service in a given rank before allowing retirement on the rates permitted for that rank. The power of retiring after 20 years' service was, undoubtedly, held out as an inducement to candidates to come forward; and, as regards that retirement on £1 a-day, no restriction will be placed upon it. The last paragraph of the Question touches on vested rights. These, as in all other branches of the Service, must be regarded as governed by the Rule enunciated by Lord Penzance's Royal Commission in 1876, that an officer's rights are limited to the rank he holds; and this Rule is embodied in the Preamble to the Royal Warrant.