§ MAJOR RASCH () Essex, ChelmsfordI beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the fact that, owing to the alterations in uniform ordered by the authorities, officers have had to supply themselves with a fresh sash (the pattern approved in January, 1902, having been changed), new fronts to their frock coats (the width between buttons having been altered), spat putties in place of gaiters (since which spat putties are not regulation), new sleeves to the service coat with badges of rank, and a new service greatcoat during the past twelve months; and will he say who is responsible for these alterations.
§ MR. BRODRICKAs regards the sash no alteration has been made in the pattern since January, 1902. The alteration of the distance between the buttons in the frock coat was for the purpose of improving the appearance. As regards spat putties, they were made regulation on the introduction of the service dress, and remain so, except for mounted officers of dismounted units who asked for and were granted permission to wear the ordinary putties without spats. The 242 pattern legging for mounted units is not yet settled: and meanwhile officers are allowed to wear the Stohwasser gaiter or puttie. The badges of rank have been altered because the former patterns were not sufficiently distinctive, but new sleeves are not required for the service coat. The new service great-coat became a necessity on the introduction of the service dress. Certain alterations in dress have been deemed necessary by the military authorities, but it si desired to reduce these changes to a minimum.
§ MAJOR RASCHMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman how an officer can live on his pay and defray the cost of all this millinery?