HC Deb 28 March 1922 vol 152 cc1111-2
12. Lieut.-Colonel Sir J. NORTON GRIFFITHS

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware of the disappointment that is felt by officers in the Army and Territorial Army Reserves that they may attend His Majesty's Levees only if wearing the full or service dress of their respective units; whether, having regard to the fact that the majority of such officers were commissioned since the outbreak of the late War, and do not and cannot afford to possess the full dress of their respective ranks and regiments, and having regard also to the widespread desire for an inexpensive alternative dress to full or service dress, he will consider what alteration might with advantage be made in the present dress regulations; if he will consider whether the uniform known as blue undress might be sanctioned for the purposes of attendance on the part of Reserve officers at Levees, subject, of course, to His Majesty's wishes, and at public functions and ceremonies, where at present to such officers full or service dress only is permitted; and whether, for the purposes suggested, and in order to mark the position of blue dress more particularly as an alternative regimental uniform, some such addition as the wearing with blue of the regimental badges, with or without a facing of the appropriate regimental colour, might be sanctioned with benefit both to the Army and to those officers who are now on the various Reserves of His Majesty?

The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Sir Laming Worthington-Evans)

With my hon. and gallant Friend's permission, I will circulate the reply to this question in the OFFICIAL REPORT—the reply being a long one.

The following is the reply:

The question that I am asked to answer really amounts to a proposal to allow certain categories of Reserve officers to provide themselves with an entirely new order of dress to wear at Levees. I sympathise with the motives that have prompted the inquiry, and feel that a short explanation of the orders of dress now in force in the Army generally will provide the best reply. With the exception of the Household Cavalry and Foot Guards, the only orders of dress at present authorised are service dress and mess dress. The Household Cavalry and Foot Guards have, in addition, full dress. His Majesty the King has permitted service dress to be worn at Levees by officers not in possession of full dress of their rank, and it would serve no real purpose to substitute for service dress the alternative recommended by my hon. and gallant Friend. Economy would not result, while the wearing of an order of dress differing from that worn by the officers of the regiments with which the Reserve officers were closely associated during the War would create the impression that these officers were no longer identified with the units in which they had served and fought, an impression which, I am sure, my hon. and gallant Friend would be the last to wish to create. The occasions, moreover, on which the categories of officers mentioned in the question would wear military uniform are limited, and I think that when these officers do wear military uniform the dress that is most appropriate is the one that carries with it not only regimental tradition, but also war-time associations and memories.