SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES, 1891–2. (Hansard, 26 June 1891)

§ (12.1.) GENERAL GOLDSWORTHY (Hammersmith)

I have a question to ask the Secretary of State for War in relation to this Vote; whether in giving consideration to the matter which formed the subject of debate last night, and having in view the saving of sums of money from the Non-Effective Vote, he will consider the propriety of granting some of these savings to the older Purchase Officers who have been wronged by the way in which the abolition of purchase has been carried out? I ask this not as finding fault with the action of the Secretary of State for War, but certain hard cases have arisen, and as there may be large savings on the Vote, I ask him to apply part of such savings to these cases. These officers have been deprived of honorary rank, and I would ask that, if possible, something should be done to meet their case.

§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. E. STANHOPE,) Lincolnshire, Horncastle

I shall be very glad to do anything in the direction of saving money on the Non-Effective Vote, and if I can see my way to doing this, I shall be very glad to devote it to removing any proved grievance in relation to any particular officer. As to whether it may be possible to give any further honours or honorary rank, I think the House on the whole will be rather reluctant to increase honorary rank. A check was put upon it a few years ago when it had grown to an extent that could not be approved of. At the same time, honorary rank has been given in a good many cases to men who richly deserved some such honours, and I shall be glad to see my way to do justice to the claims of any particularly distinguished officer. But, at the same time, to open the door to a great deal of honorary rank would not be a step approved by the Army or this House.