§ "That a sum, not exceeding £9,647,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge for the Pay, Allowances, and other Charges of His Majesty's Army at Home and Abroad (exclusive of India) (General Staff, Regiments, Reserve, and Departments,) which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1904."
§ CAPTAIN NORTON (Newington West)said he wished to draw the attention of the House to the question of the status of the officers of the Army Veterinary Department, to the insufficiency of their pay, and to limitation of their prospective career in the Army. This subject had been repeatedly raised by himself before the war, and even that very day, by a question to the Secretary of State for War. The fact was that so great was 1166 the discontent of veterinarians that the Department was unable to obtain the requisite number of officers, and at present there were thirty vacancies without candidates. It would be in the recollection of hon. Members that dining the late war, in consequence of the dearth of veterinary officers, vessels carrying horses to South Africa were despatched without veterinary surgeons on board, with the result that a large proportion of the horses were lost in the course of the voyage; and when the remainder were landed in South Africa they were rushed up country in an absolutely unprepared state for active work in the Field. In fact, millions had had to be paid in consequence of this special Department not being sufficiently staffed. He insisted that the Secretary for War should so improve the position of the veterinary surgeons in the Army, more especially by granting combatant rank, better pay, and a retiring allowance after so many years of service, that competent candidates would be induced to offer their services. Promises, to the effect that this question would be investigated, had been made 1167 before the war broke out, hut the investigation was delayed. Now that the war was over he was given to understand that a Committee was sitting considering the matter, and he thought that this was a suitable opportunity for the right hon. Gentleman to state what he had been able to do in regard to it.
§ MR. COURTENAY WARNER said that the had expected that day to see hon. Gentlemen on the opposite side of the House moving the reduction of the Vote which had been put down on the Paper preferring to the question of Army Corps, so as to press their views as to getting a more effective Army than now existed, and at less cost. He could not see this Vote passed without making a protest against the extravagant system introduced by the Secretary for War, and against the enormous numbers of the existing Army. Personally, he did not object to a large Army, but he believed the country could not and would not spend the money they were now asked to spend on the Army. The strong reaction against this extravagance, shown from day to day, was increasing; and the wave of feeling against that increased expenditure was so great that hon. Members who laughed would not be there to laugh again. The reaction, lie believed, would be a source of real danger to the country. He would not move a reduction of the Vote, because the last time he had done so he had been told that it was too large, although he thought it very modest; but a reduction there ought to be, although he saw no attempt on the part of the War Office to make it in any department of the Army, which, he felt sure, would not only endanger the position of the Secretary for War and his friends, but the efficiency of the Army as well as of the Navy.
§ MR. GEORGE WHITELEY (Yorkshire, W. R. Pudsey)said he wished to direct attention to an item in the Vote which the Committee bad not had an opportunity of discussing. He referred to the item of £90,000 for the pay of the China Expeditionary Force. Last year £50,000 had been voted for that purpose, and he could not understand how so large a sum as £90,000 could 1168 be demanded for the pay of that Expeditionary Force in the next financial year. They knew that, unfortunately, China was in a very disturbed condition, and he would like to know how many British troops were there now, and for what purpose this £90,000 was required. It was rather a strong order that they should be asked to pass such a huge sum for a purpose of which they knew nothing, and he hoped the representative of the War Office would be able to give some satisfactory explanation of it. If not, he would be compelled to move the reduction of the Vote.
§ THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Lord STANLEY, Lancashire, Westhoughton)said that the hon. and gallant Member for Newington West had practically asked the Secretary for War to prejudge a case which had been referred to a Committee which was now sitting. It was quite recognised that there was a shortage of candidates for the Veterinary-Department of the Army, and that there was a difficulty in obtaining a proper supply of veterinary surgeons; but that matter would be dealt with by the Secretary for War as soon as the Report of the Committee was presented to him.
With regard to the China Expedition, the reason for the increase was that it was rather a difficult matter to arrange all the accounts with India. India paid the money, and the British Government had now to repay India. Some of the accounts which were not rendered last year had now been rendered. The China Expeditionary Force was a remnant of the force that went out in 1900, and on y a sufficient number of troops were left as were considered to be necessary to guard our interests in China.
§ MR. WHITLEY (Halifax)asked, on a point of order, whether it was in order to pay in the next financial year expenses which had been incurred during the present year; and whether they should not have been met by a Supplementary Estimate.
*MR. SPEAKERThe matter is quite in order, as I understand the noble 1169 Lord to say that the sum will only become payable to India in the course of the next financial year.
§ *MR. BUCHANAN said that a Paper had been circulated that morning containing a restatement of the figures with reference to the Army, and an appendix was inserted which hitherto had always been inserted in the Army Estimates. He would ask why these important statements had not been included in the Army Estimates when issued. Then there was another important appendix generally inserted in the Estimates showing the sums of money which were expended on military services in the Colonies and Egypt. That had been omitted this year, and he could not think why, as it was of the greatest importance that they should know from year to year what the military expenditure out of Estimates was in the various Colonies and Egypt.
§ MR. SOARES (Devonshire, Barnstaple)said he wished to protest against the great increase in the General Staff. The Army Corps were still in a more or less nebulous condition. The men had not yet been obtained, and he should like to know whether they were going to pay officers to command these Army Corps when they had no men to command. The figures were rather serious. Exclusive of all charges for South Africa he found that the General Staff in 1901–2 was 279, and that their pay and allowances were £160,000. In 1902–3 the number increased to 338, and the pay and allowances to £194,000. For 1903–4 the General Staff was estimated at 381, and the pay and allowances at £222,000. He should like to know what was the reason for such a tremendous increase.
§ *MR. BRODRICK said that he thought the hon. Gentleman was not in the House when he made a full statement as to the Staff a few days ago He would point out that the increase in the Staff was not connected with the Army Corps scheme. The House would hardly expect him to repeat his statement; but he might say that in no case had an officer been appointed who had not troops to command. In one 1170 or two cases officers had been indicated for command before the troops were enrolled, but they would not be put on pay until they were on active duty. As to the absence of some of the tables, complained of by the hon. Gentleman, he would look into the matter. Some of the tables were rather later than usual this year.