§ House again in Committee (according to Order.)
§ [THE EARL OF ONSLOW IN THE CHAIR.]
§ Clause 2 (resumed):
Lord METHUEN,on behalf of the Earl of Meath, moved to omit the following words from the sub-section relating to the establishing or assisting of cadet battalions and corps, and also rifle clubs:
Provided that no financial assistance shall be given by an association in respect of any person in a battalion or corps in a school in receipt of a Parliamentary grant until such person has attained the age of sixteen.He wished at the outset to make his position quite clear. He did not speak in any way as a General Officer holding a high command, but rather as a member of the Lads Drill Association and as commandant of that very valuable organisation, the Church Lads Brigade. He received with great satisfaction the announcement of the clause in the original Bill, but the alteration of the clause in the other House had totally upset the good that they had expected from it. Speaking on March 23rd the Secretary of State for War gave expression to these admirable sentiments—They wanted the youth of the nation to undergo training, so that they would keep the reservoir always filled—namely, the national Army of 300,000. They wanted to work the cadet corps into a much more important position than they had been up to the present, and by so doing they would allay fear and give people a sense of security such as they had not hither to had.Mr. Haldane continued—Could anyone look upon a first rate cadet corps without feeling that every one in it was better and stronger morally and mentally? It helped him in life and in employment. It helped him to be a better citizen, not only for military but for civilian duties. From every point of view the cadet corps were things to be encouraged in the interests of the nation.The reason for the volte face on the part of the Government he hardly liked to touch upon, because he wished as far as possible to avoid politics; but he supposed there 1299 had been a certain amount of pressure on the part of those people who seemed to recognise militarism in every proposal of this kind. He had been told that people did not like their boys to be brought up to kill their foes, nor did they wish to have an Army that was always seeking to fight everyone else. They had an Army to defend their country, and they taught these boys in the schools training not that they should learn to kill, but that they should learn how to defend. He remembered his French fencing-master saying, when he asked him whether good fencers were always fighting duels, "Not at all. The man who is a good fencer is the man whom everyone avoids." So was it with the lads at school who were trained. He desired to emphasise the importance of getting hold of the boys at twelve years, for it was much easier to get them to take an interest in drill and to instil in them patriotism at that age than it was at sixteen years; and for the life of him he could not see why they could not compel boys to improve their physique, their patriotism, and their sense of discipline just as much as they compelled them to learn arithmetic and so many other school subjects. He had instructions from the War Office in 1901 to help in the training of the boys in secondary schools, and four years later it was his duty to inspect about 180 secondary schools in his command. He believed that these secondary schools would help them to officer their Auxiliary Forces far more than would the large public schools, and that they would be an example to the elementary schools. There was another point to which he wished to call attention. The War Office only granted help to uniformed cadet corps; ununiformed cadet corps, who most required help, got nothing. The Grocers Company's school, which was now a London County Council school, had been spoken of by Major General Tulloch as a school which, either in handling arms or in moving on parade, were equal to a thoroughly well-trained Line battalion, and they had won the Frankfort shield twice. Yet those boys were not entitled to help because they were an ununiformed corps; whereas those schools the parents of whose scholars were rich enough to put their sons in uniform were able to draw the grant. He had always held that what- 1300 ever the big public schools or secondary schools did would be an example to the elementary schools; and he would read short extracts from three letters of headmasters in Derby. Mr. John T. Slater, of the Derby St. James's Higher Grade School, wrote—The advantages seem to me as great mentally as physically. Straight shooting is impossible without concentration of thought and an effort of will power, there must be proper correlation of hand, eye and mind.
Mr. William Lazenby,of the St. Andrew's Day School, wrote—
To my mind it is one of the best things, if not the best, we have ever done for our boys. Would that it had been done years ago.
Mr. H. W. Yates,of the Traffic Street Council School, wrote—
The primary object I had in view in taking up this subject was to secure an additional form of organised recreation for the boys, and I find that besides achieving that object, the lads are receiving an excellent training in control of the nerve, hand, and eye.Dr. Warre had told him that the movement must come from within and not from without. That had proved perfectly true, and he could not exaggerate the help he had received form both masters and boys. He did not suppose that at any time there was more talk about the Colonies than at present, and he would like to refer their Lordships to what was being done in the way of giving military drill as part of the education of boys in the schools of Canada, Natal, and Australia. In Natal—Under the Militia Act of 1903, boys under twelve years of age must receive the elements of military drill. At twelve they were allowed to carry arms. No compulsion, however, had ever been needed. The youth of Natal were all eager to qualify as marksmen.In Australia—They had attached and were attaching to their schools a cadet system by means of which the rudimentary drill given everywhere was supplemented by sufficient training to make those boys who were trained, better set up, more obedient, more prompt, more alert. That was an excellent discipline, and even in this comparatively small population they had 30,000 cadets to-day, and would probably have 40,000 next year, and 50,000 the year after.In Canada—Thirty-three years ago they introduced military drill as a regular part of the work of all the 1301 boys in their schools. They believed in a nation prepared for arms, in a brotherhood in arms from the national standpoint, and they believed also that the most comprehensive and the most economical plan by which they could train the men of a nation to be prepared to do their duty for their country was to do it when they were school boys. Their boys took military drill when they reached the age of eleven just as regularly as they took arithmetic or grammar or any other subject, and they took it joyously.When Prince Arthur of Connaught visited Canada last year he inspected fifty-four companies of well-drilled boys in a city of leas than 300,000 inhabitants. The quotations he had read to their Lordships were from responsible Ministers of the three Colonies concerned. He had himself suffered through the youth of our country not being trained. He had men out in South Africa the only part of whose body which was in the right place when they were on horseback was their heart. They were indifferent horsemen, and as riflemen they were as great a danger to friend as to foe. He was not one of those who had ever preached militarism. He had never gone even so far as the National Defence League. He had devoted himself entirely to the training of the youth of the country, and he most earnestly appealed to their Lordships not to take any steps which would place obstacles in the way of the rising generation fitting themselves for the defence of their country when the time of danger arrived.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 4, line 9, to leave out from the word 'clubs' to the end of paragraph (f)"— (Lord Methuen.)
§ *EARL ROBERTSexpressed his gratitude to Lord Methuen for having brought forward this subject, and endorsed what his noble friend had said as to the response which masters and boys had made when appealed to. He regretted that any change in this particular matter had been made in the original draft of the Bill. It must, he thought, have been a great blow to the Secretary of State to have to alter his mind on that point, and it would be a very great loss to any Army maintained on a voluntary basis. What Lord Methuen had said as to the necessity of boys being drilled from twelve or thirteen years of age was absolutely true. It was a great blot on our educational 1302 system that boys were turned adrift and left to their own devices at the early age of thirteen or fourteen, just at the very time when they ought to be looked after and be under control. The boys in the Duke of York's School, the Royal Hibernian Military School, and the Gordon Boys' Home were kept until they were fifteen or sixteen, and those few extra years proved of ' the greatest benefit to them. It seemed to him that, in turning boys adrift at the age of thirteen or fourteen, Parliament was responsible for all the loafers and unemployed in our streets. These men had not been given the helping hand they ought to have been given, and it was because they were left to their own resources as boys and were consequently unable to look after themselves when they became men that our streets were full of unemployed. The percentage of our losses in the last campaign was infinitely greater than the losses during the campaign in Manchuria. The climate there was much more inclement than in South Africa, but our percentage of losses was double that of the Japanese or the Russians. That was a clear proof that our men did not grow up healthy and strong as they ought to, and the reason was that as boys they were not properly looked after. The present was a grand opportunity for doing something for cadet corps and for boys leaving school, and he hoped their Lordships would not let it go by. Other nations did not call the training of boys militarism. We were in such a position that our people had never had the danger of invasion brought home to them, and did not think it necessary to take the most ordinary precautions. They did not' really know what war was, having had all their battles fought for them on foreign soil. But they might depend upon it that the time would come when the danger would be brought to their own homes. He would strongly urge their Lordships, while there was yet time, not to lose this opportunity, for the sake of a few thousand pounds, of helping the poorest boys, who so much required looking after, because people talked about militarism. Those who spoke of compulsory military training and conscription being identical did not know what they were talking about. He would read an extract from a pamphlet 1303 entitled "Social Democracy and the Armed Nation "—
It may be asked in what this system of universal compulsory military training differs from conscription. It differs in the most essential features. Under conscription, generally speaking, the service is not universal; it does not fall on all classes alike. A certain number of conscripts are drawn each year, and any well-to-do youth who may happen to be drawn can escape service by paying for a substitute. Moreover, the officers are almost entirely drawn from the ' superior' classes. With the armed nation no one, unless he were physically incapacitated, would be exempt from the compulsory training, and a man would not be an officer simply because he had wealthy or influential friends, but because he had qualified himself by special studies and training for his duties. Above all, there is this vital difference, that with the armed nation there would be compulsory military training, but no military service except in time of war, when all would be liable to be called on in proportion to their age, training, etc.That was the difference between training and conscription, and he read the paragraph to their Lordships because he had heard it said by noble Lords that compulsory training meant conscription. It was absolutely different. He would only express his earnest hope that some consideration would be given to Lord Methuen's Amendment. It was, in his opinion, a most important one, and would provide the only means by which they could hope to diminish the number of the unemployed in our streets.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid it was quite impossible for His Majesty's Government to accept the Amendment. They did not oppose it because they were afraid of militarism, but because they considered that as the money to be spent under this clause was to come out of Army funds, and they had not got unlimited funds at their disposal, this was not a matter of primary importance. The noble and gallant Field-Marshal had spoken of the ages of thirteen to fifteen being dangerous periods of temptation to the youth of the country.
§ *EARL ROBERTSI said from fourteen to sixteen.
§ THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid they were not dealing in this Bill with social questions. It was a Bill the primary object of which was to raise an Army, and the Government thought 1304 that expenditure under it should be restricted to matters which were of primary military importance. It was the opinion of many military men, in spite of what had been said that evening by two distinguished military Lords, that the Army Council would hardly be justified in expending Army funds on the training of boys under sixteen, and he felt that there was a great deal of force in the view that such money would be far better spent on more directly military purposes. He would like, in this connection, to refer to Sir Edward Ward's Committee, which inquired into the provision of officers and went very thoroughly into the military value of the training given in school cadet corps. That Committee recommended that if a boy had received a thorough training in his school corps he should be exempted from four of the twelve months training which he subsequently had to undergo before qualifying for the reserve of officers. He quoted that as showing that the Committee were not biased in the opposite direction, but were quite ready to appreciate the value of cadet corps. Yet this Committee went on to say that it was of no use to commence training boys at school under the age of fifteen. Moreover, if ever there was an Amendment which amounted to a breach of privilege, this Amendment certainly did.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid that the Resolution of the Commons of July, 1676, which had been accepted over since, declared—
That all aids and supplies and aids to His Majesty in Parliament are the sole gift of the Commons, and all Bills for the granting of any such aid and supplies ought to begin with the Commons, and that it is the undoubted and sole right of the Commons to direct, limit, and appoint in such Bill the ends, purposes, considerations, conditions, limitations and qualifications of such grants, which ought not to be changed or altered by the House of Lords.The proposal to strike out this proviso seemed clearly a contravention of that Resolution.
§ THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid it would change and alter the ends, purposes, considerations, conditions and limitations of the Parliamentary grant under Clause 3.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid that, in his opinion, the proposal to strike out this proviso seemed clearly a contravention of the Commons Resolution. It was perfectly within their Lordships power to divide, and he had no doubt if they did that the Amendment would be carried; but he could hardly conceive that the House of Commons could be expected to accept an Amendment of this kind, and he ventured to express the hope that their Lordships would be content with the discussion that had taken place.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid he did not rise to address their Lordships on the merits of the Amendment, but solely with reference to the point of order which had been raised by the noble Earl the Under-Secretary. He submitted that the noble Earl had read the effect of the proviso incorrectly. It did not say that assistance was to be given, but that the assistance was not to be given—a very important difference. If the proviso were struck out the association had annually to submit a budget to the Army Council for its approval, but it did not follow that the Army Council would necessarily agree to it. The second objection to the argument of the noble Lord was that it did not follow that this money which would be given would come out of the pockets of the taxpayers of the country. If there was any excess over the amount of money allowed by the Army Council, the money was to be found out of the pockets of private members of the association. There was thus no interference on the part of the House with a Parliamentary grant.
*THE EARL OF MOUNT-EDGCUMBEsaid he had listened with extreme interest and the keenest sympathy to the speeches 1306 of the noble and gallant Lord who had moved the Amendment and the noble and gallant Field-Marshal on the cross benches. He had anticipated, in his own mind, what would be the arguments adduced by the noble Earl the Undersecretary in opposition to the Amendment, but he had not expected the argument of privilege. That argument had been fairly answered by the last speaker. When, however, the Undersecretary said that this provision was not of primary importance to the measure, he reminded him of the extreme weight attached by Mr. Haldane to the encouraging of that patriotic spirit which would lead large numbers of young men to join the Territorial Army, for without the influence of that spirit this great measure was doomed to failure. The subject was, therefore, of very great importance, for, in the opinion of the Secretary for War, it was essential to the safety of the country, the maintenance of peace, and the avoidance of anything in the nature of compulsory service. At the same time, their Lordships saw an extraordinary anomaly such as he believed could hardly exist in the government of any country, but this. While the Secretary for War was appealing to this patriotic spirit to establish defensive forces, a Minister in the same Cabinet at the head of the Education Department was apologising for having ventured to encourage drill and shooting in certain elementary schools, and practically promising that they would not be insisted upon. Mr. Birrell said that, not because it was bad for the boys, or that it would interfere with their education, but because he had made up his mind that as long as he was at the head of the Education Department, he would never allow the Education Department to become an auxiliary of the Army. In his judgment, that was an extraordinary instance of a House divided against itself on a point vital to the safety of the country, and he was afraid the same condition of things prevailed at the present time.
THE EARL OF ROSEBERYMy Lords, I am very 10th indeed to take any part in the debate on this Bill. The measure embodies a great plan 1307 which, I think, on the face of it, recommends itself largely to my mind at any rate, and to the mind of many civilians who are unacquainted with the technical details of Army affairs, but if the Amendment now before the Committee is pressed to a division, I shall certainly feel it my duty to vote for it. My conscience is clear in that respect, because I am not opposing the Government; I am endeavouring to restore the Government to its first intentions. I am voting for the Government against the Government itself, and therefore my hands are clean.
I confess that I listened with great curiosity to the arguments by which the Under-Secretary was disposed to set on one side the more convincing arguments of his chief. The noble Earl's arguments resolved themselves into two —first, that the Amendment was a breach of privilege; and, secondly, that the funds to be applied were military funds which ought not to be applied to a purpose which was not military. Now, I venture to think that there is no base for either of those contentions, I think that the privilege of the other House of Parliament in respect of finance should be jealously observed in this House. I remember the time when the Education Bill of the late Government was before us, and when, not a coach and six, or a coach and twelve, but three coaches and twelve were driven through that privilege. Your Lordships will remember the Amendment of the Bishop of Manchester about the maintenance of schools, and I confess that when I think of that transaction I am rather disposed to blush for the proceedings of this House.
But, on the other hand, we ought not to strain this question of privilege so as to fetter our discussions and to rule almost every topic of interest out of range. It is a case of the utmost pedantry to urge this question of privilege now, for, in the first place, you are not enlarging any expenditure, but simply cancelling from the clause a possible limitation on expenditure. The Bill, as it will go down to the Commons it this Amendment be carried—and I confess that looking at the somewhat sparsely tenanted benches opposite, I cannot 1308 doubt that it will be carried—will contain, so far as this clause is concerned, no financial injunction or restriction whatever. It is impossible, therefore, to believe that there is any question of privilege in this Amendment; while as to military funds, I think that my noble friend Lord Camperdown has shown, in his short but unanswerable speech, that the funds to be given by the Army Council will be largely diluted in the expectation of the Government by voluntary contributions. I left the House last night when it was engaged in an earnest desire to find out what the duties of the president of the local association would be, and I confess that I left the House because I saw very clearly what the duties of the president would be. One of his main duties will be to act as a competent subscriber to the funds of the association. I think it is perfectly clear from the announcements of the Government that the funds of the associations provided by the Government will be wholly inadequate for the purpose the Government have in view, and that, therefore, voluntary subscriptions must largely enter into the finance of the associations. That has a further bearing. My right hon. friend Mr. Haldane was extremely anxious, and rightly anxious, to enlist in support of his scheme the public spirit and patriotism of the country. To do that you must allow the public spirit and patriotism of the country to find the vent which it wants itself. You must not shut it up in the narrow groove laid down for it by the Act of Parliament or by the Military Council. You must give it free vent. You must do everything you can to stimulate that enthusiasm and patriotism. I am quite sure that anything in this Bill which cools or damps that enthusiasm and patriotism is a fatal blow struck at the county scheme.
Now, you say that these purposes are not military purposes. Since when have they ceased to be military purposes? How long will it take a boy at fifteen to reach the age of eighteen? I do not know whether the memory of the Government is so short that it has forgotten altogether what happened in the South African War. After the first line was exhausted you had to call 1309 on the nation for Volunteers. You got Volunteers. Lord Methuen has described in his singularly stirring speech how many of those Volunteers were absolutely untrained; that they could not ride and they could not shoot, but their hearts were in the right place. If you train boys in schools, three years hence you will have a reserve force capable in the case of war of coming to the assistance of the country, not as untrained, but as trained Volunteers. Is that so miserable a consideration that His Majesty's Government are compelled to overlook it in a great Territorial scheme?
I think it extremely possible that if your Lordships pass this Amendment the House of Commons will reinsert the original words; and in that case I should respectfully urge your Lordships not to insist on your Amendment. But in any case I hope you will divide, because you will then be enabled to present to the country a weight of opinion which I do not think even the House of Commons can equal, when we remember the Generals and the men of high military capacity who have addressed us tonight. You will present a weight of opinion to the country on behalf of this proposal which no Government in the long run can afford to disregard.
*THE EARL OF DUNDONALDreminded their Lordships that in Natal, which had been referred, to in addition to compulsory cadet training for three years, there was compulsory adult training for fifteen days in each year of Militia service—more training than was contemplated in the Territorial Army scheme. He maintained that, unless men who entered the Territorial Army received more training than was compulsory in this Bill, that Army would only be a mockery. The training of the soldier might be divided into two portions. The first portion, the purely mechanical, could well be learnt in boyhood before commencing the serious business of life, which might be said to begin at the age of sixteen. If the proviso at present in the clause remained part of the Bill the youth of the country-would be prohibited from getting in their school-boy days that knowledge which was absolutely essential, not only to an efficient Territorial Army, 1310 but to that great reservoir from which they hoped to draw.
§ LORD NEWTON,referring to the aversion of the noble and gallant Lord to treating this matter in a political spirit, said that the history of the change in the Bill was political and political only. It was an open secret that the change was made in consequence of the vehement opposition of those Gentlemen who were credited as representing what were called the labouring classes. If military opinions were going to be quoted, he thought the House generally would agree that the opinions of the noble and gallant Lord who moved the Amendment and of the noble and gallant Earl Lord Roberts, outweighed the collective opinions of those who sat upon the Committee to which the noble Earl the Under-Secretary had alluded with so much respect. He really thought it advisable to draw the attention of the House to the extraordinary attitude adopted with regard to this particular question by the Labour leaders. Apparently in the view of those representatives the British male child when he was born was to be fed, clothed, and educated at the expense of the State; as he grew older he was to be amused and entertained by the State, employment at a subsequent stage was to be found for him, and in his later years he was to be pensioned. But if, in return for all this, any kind of suggestion was made that he should give any personal or other service to the State, it was resented as little better than a gross insult. Not only were these views ostentatiously avowed, but, as they had learnt within the last few days from admissions made by noble Lords on the Government side of the House, the Labour leaders who represented the voice of the trade unions intended to do their utmost to prevent any man who had been foolish enough to enlist in the Army from obtaining employment when he left the Army. If those were the opinions entertained by the country it would be a bad look out for the country as a nation. But for his part he declined to believe that that was the case. He did not believe that in this particular instance these men represented the working classes or any class in the country. 1311 It was matter for infinite regret that the Government, with its overwhelming majority, should have made this contemptible and ignoble surrender to the Labour leaders. The Bill was in a critical condition; a severe blow administered to it might endanger its existence altogether. If the scheme was going to fail, as of course it was, he advised their Lordships to let its failure rest on those who were responsible for bringing it in.
LORD ELLENBOROUGHwished to deal with one point mentioned by the Under-Secretary. The noble Earl had stated that drill was of no use under the age of fifteen. In common with our older admirals he began rifle or rather musket drill at the age of thirteen. Before he was fourteen he had bruised his shoulder a good deal in firing Old Brown Bess at a target. That inconvenience was now got over by the use of miniature rifles. If any of their Lordships doubted the advantage of early drill he hoped they would consult the Admirals who were his contemporaries. Had he or any midshipmen of that time left the Navy at the age of sixteen they would have been efficient members of any Volunteer corps, and would have been able to use a rifle without imperilling the lives of their comrades, if sudden emergency had arisen. From twelve to sixteen boys could be more easily spared than at a later period when they had begun a profession or trade. If they took no steps to teach the rising generation how to protect the liberty that they had inherited, they might be rearing the future serfs of some other nation.
§ *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEMy Lords, I do not rise to prolong this debate. Everything that I desire to say upon this Amendment has been said by noble Lords who have spoken in support of it. But I do not like to give a silent vote, and I rise for the purpose of saying that when we go to a Division I shall certainly give my vote in favour of my noble friend Lord Methuen's Amendment. I am not in the least intimidated by the argument founded upon privilege to which we have listened. I have been a long time a member of this House, and I know that whenever one's opponent is at 1312 a loss for an argument this argument of privilege is trotted out. According to the extreme supporters of the privilege view, this House is precluded from dealing with any subject which directly or indirectly involves the expenditure of half-a-crown. If that view is to prevail, the usefulness of this House will be limited to an even greater extent than is recommended by the supporters of some of the proposals which are now before the public.
This Amendment cannot be represented as an Amendment antagonistic to the Bill. The words which we propose to leave out were not in the original Bill, and we have our own idea of the circumstances under which they found a place in it. What the Amendment of my noble friend does is to remove a restriction—as it seems to me an improper restriction—which it has been sought to put upon the usefulness of these County Associations—a restriction which will have the effect of preventing them from doing work of a kind which they are eminently qualified to do. You tell them in this Bill that it is to be part of their duty to assist cadet corps and rifle clubs. I ask upon what reasons of common-sense can you tell them that if those rifle clubs are joined by lads below the age of sixteen the association is to be absolutely forbidden from recognising or countenancing them?
The noble Earl in charge of the Bill told us that this was not a proper way of spending Army funds, but, as my noble friend Lord Camperdown has pointed out, we know quite well that these associations will dispose of funds the whole of which will not be drawn from Army sources; and if this clause were to pass as it now stands, the associations would be in this ridiculous position, that they might have considerable funds subscribed from private sources, and would find themselves precluded from spending one sixpence in assisting these cadet corps or rifle clubs. I am not prepared to take upon myself the responsibility of thus limiting the action of the County Associations, and I shall therefore certainly vote for the Amendment.
*THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (The Earl of CREWE)My Lords, like the noble Marquess who has just sat down I do not desire to spend 1313 any time in discussing the question of privilege. At the same time, as it has been stated with such certainty that this is not a breach of privilege, I think it is important to point out that, in view of the wording of the Commons' Resolution relating to the purposes and conditions of any money grant, this Amendment, if it is carried, may very likely be taken in another place to constitute a breach of privilege. But the question of privilege has nothing whatever to do with His Majesty's Government, and there is nothing to prevent noble Lords from carrying Amendment after Amendment which constitutes a breach of privilege. It is not the affair of the Government. It is a question for Mr. Speaker and the officials of the House of Commons. If this Amendment goes to the other House, no doubt it will receive proper attention from Mr. Speaker and the officials of that House.
Now, I desire to say a very few words on the merits of the case. My noble friend behind me was quite right in saying that it is not on the ground of a dread of militarism that we are unable to assent to this Amendment. There are people who conceive that to teach boys of tender age drill and the use of the rifle is necessarily to develope in them a taste for slaughter. I respect people who hold that view honestly, but I confess it does not seem to me a very sensible view, and I do not believe it is widely held. We all remember that the South African War produced in this country some very real and fine manifestations of patriotism. It also produced a certain number—not many—of silly and rather ignoble exhibitions of what was held to pass as patriotism. But those exhibitions were not the work of people who had undergone any military training. The people who made fools of themselves were, I believe, people of strictly pacific habits, who had never seen a shot fired in anger, and probably never intended to if they could help it. Therefore from that point of view I have no dread of what is called military training.
But we have to consider what is behind this proposition in the mind of a great many people, as indeed was frankly admitted by the noble and gallant 1314 Field Marshal on the cross benches. A large number of people regard this proposition with distaste because they believe that it is a step towards what some call conscription, but what, in deference to the noble and gallant Earl, I will speak of as universal military training. I am bound to say that in spite of the noble and gallant Earl's very lucid description of the difference between the two the extent of that difference is not very clear to my mind. It still seems to me that if you have universal military training in this country you will have something very much like the conscript army as understood on the Continent of Europe.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEI take it that your Army for Home Defence will consist of the young men who are at the time undergoing military training. It has never occurred to me that you would have an immense force of young men undergoing training and a large Home Defence Army as well. Therefore, it appears to me that the distinction is not a very wide one. But I will let that pass. In the minds of many people there is the fear that this proposition is intended to facilitate the advance to a system of universal military training. If you train these boys on a large scale, with public money, the next step surely will be to say: "What a waste not to turn these boys into real soldiers." It seems to me that argument is a very natural one, and I believe it is that fear which is really at the back of the minds of those who object to this particular proposal. I am not ashamed to say that, like other members of the Government, I do not think it is wise in a matter of this kind to go against a great current of public opinion, and I do not see how it can be denied, after what has occurred in another place, that such, a body of opinion exists.
The noble Lord opposite, Lord Newton, has put aside entirely the opinion of those who are known as the Labour Members of Parliament. We are not able to take that position, for the very excellent reason that they do speak, as we believe, for, I do not say the whole, but a very great majority, of those who would be affected 1315 by this provision, and for the working classes at large. We in this House are in no way affected by this proposition, and it does seem to me somewhat absurd altogether to ignore the representatives of the particular class whose children will be affected by the passing of this Amendment. I do not think the noble Marquess who has just sat down appreciated that this limitation applies only to schools in receipt of the Government grant. He spoke of all boys under sixteen not being assisted. This is only the case where the school is in receipt of the Government grant; and it is because we believe that those specially affected have a strong prejudice against this proposal that we do not think it right to press it against them. In regard to public schools, the case is an entirely different one. The reason for encouraging drill and rifle shooting and training generally in public schools is that it is hoped they will form a very valuable reservoir for officers of the Army. The two cases are not analogous, and consequently I am sorry to say, in spite of all the arguments addressed to the House I admit by those who are most competent to speak on military matters, we are not able to retreat from the position we have taken up on this matter.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord LOREBURN)said he entirely agreed with his noble friend Lord Crewe that the partisans of militarism during the South African War were not the brave men who fought and who suffered heavily, but a number of persons, largely in the Press, who had not the slightest intention of running any risk themselves. The proposal before their Lordships affected children who were mostly the children of working-class parents, and those parents were the persons who made objection to this proposal. He thought it was a very serious matter for either House of Parliament to try and thrust upon children
§ a particular kind of training, however desirable they might think it, when the fathers of those children did not themselves desire it. With regard to the question of privilege, he could not help thinking that it would be a misfortune if the rule and custom that had been observed by both Houses should be infringed. It seemed to him there was no doubt that this Amendment, if it was assented to, would be an interference with the Commons' Resolution. He could not doubt that it would be resisted and objected to in the other House, and he could not assent to the suggestion of the noble Earl, Lord Rosebery, that an Amendment which was quite certain to be rejected, and which was also contrary to privilege, ought, as a matter of policy, to be carried.
§ *THE EARL OF HALSBURYsaid he had frequently endeavoured to preserve the Commons' privilege from invasion, sometimes a little more earnestly than some of his friends desired. He entirely differed from his distinguished friend. When they dealt with some particular part of a statute and severed it from the rest of the provisions, so that, the effect of an alteration was only incidental, it had been held over and over again in both Houses that no breach of privilege was involved. That was the case here. The noble and learned Lord seemed to have forgotten that this Amendment would restore the Bill to the position in which it was when the Government introduced it. If the Amendment was open to these objections, why did not the Government find it out before the Bill was introduced?
§ On Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause,"
§ Their Lordships divided:—Contents, 31; Not-contents, 130.
1317| CONTENTS. | ||
| Loreburn, L. (L. Chancellor.) | Selby, V. | Denman, L. [Teller] Dunning. L. (L. Rollo) |
| Crewe, E. (L. President.) Beauchamp, E. | Hereford, L. Bp. | Elgin, L. (E. Elgin and Kincardine.) |
| Carrington, E. | Allendale, L. | Fitzmaurice, L. |
| Chesterfield, E. | Armitstead, L. | Glantawe, L |
| Craven, E. | Colebrooke, L. | Granard, L. (E. Granard) |
| Portsmouth, E. | Courtney of Penwith, L. | [Teller.] |
| Hamilton of Dalzell, L. | Lucas, L. | Sandhurst, L. |
| Haversham, L. | Monkswell, L. | Stanmore, L. |
| Headley, L. | Nunburnholme, L. | Weardale, L. |
| Joicey, L. | Ribblesdale, L. | Welby, L. |
| NOT-CONTENTS. | ||
| Bedford, D. | Romney, E. | Clinton, L. |
| Northumberland, D. | Scarbrough, E. | Clonbrok, L. |
| Richmond and Gordon, D. | Stanhope, E. | Colchester, L. |
| Rutland, D. | Strange, E. (D. Atholl.) | Cottesloe, L. |
| Wellington, D. | Vane, E. (M. Londonderry.) | Dawnay, L. (V. Downe.) |
| Waldegrave, E. | Desborough, L. | |
| Bath, M. | Westmeath, E. | Digby, L. |
| Camden, M. | Wharncliffe, E. | Dunboyne, L. |
| Hertford, M. | Wicklow, E | Ellenborough, L. |
| Lansdowne, M. | Faber, L. | |
| Salisbury, M. | Cross, V. | Fingall, L. (E. Fingall.) |
| Zetland, M. | Esher, V. | Forester, L. |
| Falkland, V. | Grey de Ruthyn, L. | |
| Abingdon, E. | Falmouth, V. | Hastings, L. |
| Ancaster, E. | Goschen, V. | Hindlip, L. |
| Brownlow, E. | Hampden, V. | Kensington, L. |
| Camperdown, E. | Hardinge, V. | Killanin, L. |
| Carlisle, E. | Hill, V. | Kilmarnock, L. (E. Erroll.) |
| Carnwath, E. | Hutchinson, V. (E. Donough- | Knaresborough, L. |
| Cathcart, E. ; | more.) | Lawrence, L. |
| Cawdor, E. | Knutsford, V. | Lovat, L. |
| Clarendon, E. | Milner, V. | Ludlow, L. |
| Cranbrook, E. | Portman, V. | Manners, L. |
| Dartrey, E. | Methuen, L. [Teller.] | |
| Derby, E. | Southwark, L. Bp. | Moncrieff, L. |
| Devon, E. | Montagu of Beaulieu, L. | |
| Dundonald, E. | Aberdare, L. | Muskerry, L. |
| Durham, E. | Abinger, L. | Newton, L. |
| Egerton, E. | Addington, L. | Ponsonby, L. (E. Bessborough. ) |
| Eldon, E. | Ampthill, L. | Raglan, L. |
| Essex, E. | Ashbourne, L. | Ravensworth, L. |
| Fortescue, E. | Atkinson, L. | Ritchie of Dundee, L. |
| Haddington, E. | Avebury, L. | Robertson, L. |
| Halsbury. E. | Balfour, L. | Rosebery, L. (E. Rosebery.) |
| Harewood, E. | Barnard, L. | St. Levan, L. |
| Ilchester, E. | Basing, L. | St. Oswald, L. |
| Lindsey, E. | Belper, L. | Saltoun, L. |
| Lonsdale, E. | Blythswood, L. | Sandys, L |
| Manvers, E. | Bolton, L. | Shute, L. (V. Barrington.) |
| Mar and Kellie, E. | Borthwick, L. | Stewart of Garlies, L. |
| Morley. E. | Brassey, L. | (E. Galloway.) |
| Mount Edgcumbe, E. | Brodrick, L. (V. Midleton.) | Sudley, L. (E. Arran.) |
| Northbrook, E. | Burton, L. | Tennyson, L. [Teller.] |
| Onslow, E. | Calthorpe, L. | Tyrone, L. (M. Water ford.) |
| Plymouth, E. | Clements, L. (E. Leitrim.) | Vivian, L. |
| Roberts, E. | Clifford of Chudleigh, L. |
On Question, new clause, as amended, agreed to.
LORD LOVATmoved to delete from the duties of the County Association the provision of horses for the peace requirements of the Territorial Force. He submitted that the provision of horses was the duty of Yeomanry officers, as it obviously came under training.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 4, lines 14 and 15, to leave out paragraph (g)."—(Lord Lovat.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid the Government could not accept the Amendment. They thought that the provision 1318 of horses for the Territorial Force was essentially a question for the Associations, which would possess extensive local knowledge and were on that account better able to deal with it.
LORD LOVATintimated that he did not intend to press the Amendment, but he could not help pointing to the absurd position which would be created in the event of the County Associations producing horses which the Yeomanry colonels were unable to use.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
1319§ LORD MONTAGU of BEAULIEUmoved to omit Subsection (h), conferring on the County Associations powers in regard to "the safe custody of arms and equipment." He expressed the view that the custody of arms and equipment should be entrusted to the commanding officer, and not to the County Associations, because he was responsible for keeping them clean, etc.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 4, line 16, to leave out Paragraph (h)."—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid that if the County Associations had to provide arms and equipment out of the funds allocated to them by the Army Council, and generally to maintain the county force, they were surely the natural and proper repository of the arms. He could not accept the Amendment.
§ THE EARL OF ERROLLasked who would be responsible for the arms supposing the general inspecting found fault with them. Would the colonel commanding the regiment or the County Association be responsible?
LORD LOVATsaid that under the arrangement proposed by the Government it would be necessary to have two caretakers, one man responsible for the care of the arms and for seeing that they were kept in an efficient state, and the other responsible to the local Association for their custody.
Lord LUCASsaid the fact that the County Associations would be responsible for the arms and equipment would not prevent them placing the arms in charge of the commanding officer of the regiment if found necessary. The commanding officer would then be responsible for them, and there would be no need to provide two caretakers.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid he was a little astonished to hear that the County Associations were to provide the arms; but surely it could not be the intention of the Government to give them the right of determining what arms His Majesty's troops were to bear. 1320 Was it to be possible for conflicting orders to be given by the County Association and the commanding officer as to the state and custody of the arms, and, in such a contingency, was the commanding officer to be subordinate to the County Association?
LORD LUCASsaid it was hardly conceivable that the County Association would give orders as to the custody of the arms which were at variance with the requirements of the officers in command.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDsaid the commanding officers were at present responsible to the War Office for the state of the arms. It was now proposed to make the associations responsible, but it was said that if the associations had any common sense they would hand over the custody of the arms to the commanding officers. Now, in the event of a commanding officer letting the arms get rusty and in a bad condition, what would happen? There would, no doubt, be some form of inspection by the War Office. What would the War Office do in that event? Would the association, as declared in the Bill be responsible, or could they say they had handed over the responsibility to the commanding officer and that the War Office must deal with him? The safe custody of arms was a very important matter, particularly at times of public disturbance, and it had always been understood that arms which were given to local forces had to be lodged in buildings approved of by an inspecting officer representing the War Office. Was the safe custody of the arms to be left in future entirely to the association, or were they to be subject to any control in the matter by the War Office? He hoped the Committee would have some further information on those points.
§ *LORD BELPERsaid that so far as he could see, the governing words were those at the beginning of sub-section (2) of Clause 2, which ran—
The powers and duties so transferred or assigned may include any powers conferred on or vested in His Majesty, and any powers or duties conferred or imposed on the Army Council or a Secretary of State.Therefore, what were to be transferred to the County Associations were powers 1321 now vested in the Secretary of State or the Army Council. Whether that was a convenient procedure or not seemed to him rather a nice point. But, so far as he could understand, the confusion between the County Associations and the officers commanding the regiments in the county need not necessarily be more than the confusion between the Army Council or the Secretary of State and those same officers. It did not seem to him that the powers of officers commanding regiments were taken away, but that the powers of the Army Council and the Secretary of State were transferred.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDheld that this made the matter more difficult, because the powers of the Secretary of State were paramount. Therefore, if those powers were transferred, the Associations, which would be composed largely of civilians, would be paramount in these important matters.
§ *VISCOUNT MIDLETONsuggested the insertion of the words, "The provision of buildings for," before the words "the safe custody of arms and equipment." He believed that would satisfy those who objected to the sub-section as it stood, and would really carry out the intention of the Government.
§ LORD MONTAGU Of BEAULIEUinquired whether the commanding officer or the County Association would be responsible in the event of the armoury being broken into by a mob and the arms stolen.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHthought the County Association would be responsible. With regard to the suggestion made by Lord Midleton, he suggested that in order that they might make this point quite clear he should be allowed to bring up words on Report.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDinquired what the noble Earl would bring up on Report. The Committee were not quite clear on that point. The noble Earl had just stated that the County Association would be responsible for the safe custody of the arms. That was what noble Lords objected to. It had been admitted that the Association 1322 could not practically be responsible, and that it must hand over the care of the arms to the commanding officer. He would object very much to anything being put in on Report to provide that the Association should be responsible for the care of the arms. But if the noble Earl intended moving to insert on Report some words such as were suggested by Lord Midleton, and if he would add "subject to the approval of some military authority," it would meet his point.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid this was rather a technical question, and he wished to provide that there should be proper security in the matter. Therefore, with the permission of their Lordships, he would consider the matter between then and the Report stage, with a view to inserting words which would make the meaning plain and clear.
§ LORD MONTAGU Of BEAULIEUwas quite willing to withdraw the Amendment, if the noble Earl would undertake to make it clear as to which part was to be the duty of the County Association, and which part that of the commanding officer.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHpromised to make that clear.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
LORD LOVATmoved an Amendment to provide that the requirements on mobilisation of the units of the Territorial Force (the duty of supplying which might be transferred under the clause to the County Associations) so far as they are directed by the Army Council to be met locally, should be defined by the Army Council before the passing of the Bill. He said that he brought up the point in no hostile spirit to the scheme, but because, although the Bill dealt with a great many points which Yeomanry and Volunteer officers had pressed for, yet there were no adequate arrangements for mobilisation. That was not the first time he had addressed their Lordships on this subject, and he would therefore make his remarks on the present occasion as brief as possible. They had made practically little or no progress since the South 1323 African War in the way of preparing for mobilisation for home defence. No one could say that either the Yeomanry or the Volunteer Force was in any way capable of taking the field. It was true that arrangements for coast defence had been pushed forward, but really sufficient and adequate arrangements for mobile corps inland had not been thoroughly thought out in detail. He would, therefore, suggest that the Army Council should be asked to define with the utmost possible rapidity what the requirements were to be that the County Associations were to meet. Every year they had been told, when they pressed this question, from whichever side of the House the Government of the day happened to be drawn, that the Army Council had wonderful things in store for them if they would only wait a little. They had waited a long time now; and, although the subject had been brought up by numberless noble Lords, including Field-Marshal Lord Roberts, yet they had never been given a scheme which would in any way fulfil the requirements. He thought that as the majority of the Army Council had now been at the War Office for something like four years, the requirements that they wished to be met by the County Associations should have been thoroughly deliberated upon; and that the time had come when those requirements ought to be announced. He hoped the noble Earl would not retire behind the usual official answer to such questions that it was inadvisable that the facts should be made public. The whole of Europe was thoroughly aware that we had no Home organisation; and he thought that an announcement of any plan towards that end would be so much clear gain; and that the publication of any orders which the Government might issue to the County Associations need not be delayed on that account. He would not go into the questions of the staff, the transport, and all the various matters with regard to horses and equipment, but would only deal with one or two general principles which he thought must in any event hold good, and which, he felt certain, the House would accept. It was essential to have these preparations thought out in time of peace; because the less trained men 1324 they had for the Army, the more trained must be the staff in order to make good the defences of the country; and further, the less trained were the troops, the better must be the arrangements as to feeding, tents, and so on; because the less trained the troops were, the less strain and difficulty were they able to withstand. Therefore he thought His Majesty's Government should be pressed if possible to let them know when, those requirements would be made known to the County Associations. There was a point which arose now which had not arisen in former Acts with regard to mobilisation, and that was the question of billeting. By this Bill, power was taken to call out a very large number of men—in fact, the whole of the Territorial Force; but, as far as he knew, if they were called out, there was nowhere to put them. In Scotland, certainly, there was nothing like tent accommodation for the whole forces of Scotland; and he believed the same could be said with regard to every single command throughout the country. Where were they to put the men? They could not be away for more than a few days, and the only billeting places at present were the public-houses, and the public-house was the one place where the men should never be allowed to go if it could possibly be helped. He hoped the noble Lord would be able to tell them what arrangements had been made with regard to that point; because, on the calling out of the Territorial Army, if it should become necessary, the only thing His Majesty's Government would be able to do would be to dismiss it again, because they would have nowhere to put it. The remainder of the mobilisation arrangements at the present moment were in practically the same unthought-out state. With regard to the staff, the staff was practically, as they knew, non-existent. They were going to have, by the Bill, four staff officers provided for the whole of Scotland—that was all they had been told at present—two divisions with two staff officers each. The County Associations would have enough work to do in finding the minor officers on the staff. The question of horse registration had been often discussed in that House, and need not then be gone into further; but 1325 he hoped His Majesty's Government would see fit to make public what they required from the County Associations.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 4, line 20, after the word 'locally,' to insert the words 'which requirements shall be defined by the Army Council before the passing of this Act.' "—(Lord Lovat.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid it was quite impossible to put a statutory provision of the kind proposed into an Act of Parliament. The matters referred to were all of very great importance, and he could assure his noble friend they were being most carefully considered by the general staff. They were, obviously, as it seemed to him, matters for Regulations under the Act, but he could not put them in as a statutory provision before the passing of the Act.
§ *Earl FORTESCUEasked whether, upon the Report stage, his noble friend would consider whether this clause might not be amended in the direction of utilising the County Associations for certain requirements of the Regular Forces as well as the Territorial Force-There was nothing said in Subsection (k) about the registration of vehicles as well as of horses. Vehicles would be wanted as much as horses in the event of mobilisation, and he imagined that if the Expeditionary Force was ever sent away to the number of 160,000 men they would want very likely to take more vehicles than the Army Service wagons in store at Woolwich, and there were other things besides which might be available from local sources. It had been proposed, he believed, by the correspondent of The Times that the different divisions of Regulars in the country should each have allotted to them one or more counties from which to draw horses and vehicles in case of mobilisation; and he would ask his noble friend to give consideration to that matter before the Report stage, and, if necessary, to propose an Amendment of this sub-clause accordingly.
§ *VISCOUNT MIDLETONthought all their Lordships, including His Majesty's Government, would sympathise with the object which his noble friend had 1326 in view. It was obvious that to raise a large Territorial Force, and to leave in abeyance any longer the provision for mobilisation of that Force, would be injurious to the last degree. At the same time he fully recognised the plea of the noble Earl that it was impossible for the Government to lay down those requirements before the passing of the Act. He would ask the Government whether it was not possible to amend Lord Lovat's Amendment, and to allow these words to be inserted, "According to the scheme which shall be made by the Army Council upon the passing of this Act." He thought those words would entirely carry out the wish of the Government, and would also give effect to the desire of his noble friend Lord Lovat.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he should not like to go quite as far as the suggestion of his noble friend; he would prefer to say, "as soon as possible," instead of "upon the passing of this Act." The former words would not tie the Government down to any particular date. They wanted, of course, to do it as quickly as they could, but did not wish to be bound to do it "upon the passing of this Act."
§ *VISCOUNT MIDLETONsaid that it seemed to him that the words "upon the passing of this Act "would practically mean "as soon as possible."
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he would consider the form of words with a view to seeing whether it was not possible for the Government to meet his noble friend in some way.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ *EARL FORTESCUE,in moving an Amendment to provide for the establishment of corps of civilian guides, said that it was well known that even in the case of an Army operating in a friendly country it was often desirable to make use, for some purposes, of local guides. The object of the Amendment he proposed was to allow the County Associations to 1327 take steps to organise and register such persons beforehand. He was aware that that had been done in one or two districts in this country with comparatively little trouble or expense. The officer commanding the Royal Artillery in the North-East District had organised a corps there, and having heard from him what he had done, he himself (Earl Fortescue) had succeeded in a small way in organising a similar corps in the district from which the North Devon Yeomanry were recruited. At that time he commanded that regiment, the recruiting ground of which extended from the borders of Somerset to the borders of Cornwall, and in a short time, and by the expenditure of only a few pounds in circulars and postage-stamps, he had been able to get the names of over 150 people who declared their readiness to come forward in case of necessity to help the troops by means of their local knowledge. They were not frontiersmen or backwoodsmen, or anything of that sort; they were simply natives of the locality, such as past and present masters of hounds, and hunt servants, road surveyors, county councillors, farmers, and people of all classes, some of whom knew a great deal of country, while others knew only the gates, gaps, wood-paths, and so on in their own parishes. But if the regiment he had referred to had been mobilised, and had had to take up the duty assigned to it of , patrolling the coast, he was certain that they would have derived very great assistance from the local knowledge of these people, who would have been able to show the men a great many paths of which they were previously ignorant: and there was no doubt they would have been enabled, in that way, to effect great economies of horse-flesh in carrying on their work. Among those whose names were given to him were men who could have taken a letter or guided a party for miles across the country, through woods and by by-paths, without ever going for a mile on a frequented road. He begged to move.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 4, line 26, after the word ' soldiers ' to insert ' (m) Establishing corps of civilian guides.' "—(Earl Fortescue.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid the Amendment of his noble friend dealt with Earl Fortescue. 1328 a matter which appeared to him to belong exclusively to the general staff, who did not consider that it would be necessary to have these words inserted. The general staff would undertake the full responsibility for making provision for the performance of the duties which any corps such as his noble friend suggested could be supposed to undertake in time of war. His Majesty's Government quite realised the importance and value of corps of that i kind, and under the circumstances he would ask his noble friend not to press his Amendment, because it was a matter which the general staff wished to take entirely upon themselves.
THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREasked whether they were to understand that this was a suggestion the importance of which the general staff had fully realised. He had a very lively recollection, when he was at the War Office, of there being a very large pile of papers on this subject, and he did not remember any suggestion in those papers unfriendly to the proposal of the noble Earl. He sincerely hoped that this matter—which, he ventured to say, would, if carried out, provide a most valuable auxiliary machinery to the general staff—would not be lost sight of, because he was certain that the Government, if they could see their way to taking any such step, would have the unanimous support of the whole country.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid that his noble friend, Lord Donoughmore, accurately interpreted his intention— that the general staff had fully realised the great importance of the proposal. He was very glad the discussion had taken place, because it had given him an opportunity of stating to the House that the general staff recognised its full and complete responsibility in the matter, and he had been asked by them to state that it was a matter which they would prefer to take upon themselves.
§ *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEI rather hope that my noble friend (Earl Fortescue) will accept the noble Earl's suggestion and withdraw his Amendment. I would remind him that this list does not profess to be an exhaustive enumeration of the duties of the County Associations, and the mere fact that the 1329 corps of guides are not mentioned by name will not in itself preclude the County Associations from dealing with that point.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn,
§ Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 3:—
*LORD SALTOUN,in moving the omission of the words "in the opinion of the Army Council" from Sub-clause (1), which provided for the payment by the Army Council to a County Association the sums required to meet the necessary expenditure connected with the exercise and discharge of the powers and duties of the Association, said that he had put this Amendment on the Paper for the purpose of drawing more particular attention to the answers which the Under-Secretary for War had given to certain questions which were asked before their Lordships went into Committee yesterday. It seemed to him that those questions, which had been put by his noble friend, Lord Hardinge, were very important, and that they had been most inadequately answered. He would not go into the details of the questions, but the whole of them were answered to the effect that the grant of £75 per company of infantry was intended to cover the administrative expenses of the Association, and that it was hoped that the cost of the working of the County Associations would be kept as low as possible. The Under-Secretary for War had further said that the County Associations would no doubt require office accommodation, and the Bill provided for the appointment of a secretary, who presumably would be a salaried official, and who would require large offices and additional assistants for bookkeeping and so on. So far as he could understand, the whole of those funds were bound to come out of the £75 per company spoken of by the Undersecretary, for he could not see what other source those funds were to come from, so far as had at present been pointed out by the Government. In fact they had pointed out no way, and the result was that while there was not the smallest doubt that these County Associa- 1330 tions might be enormously expensive especially at their starting, the sum proposed was utterly and entirely inadequate for the purpose. The Under-Secretary for War had also, he believed, said that if there was an outstanding debt incurred by the Association it would have to come out of the pockets of the members of the Association. Under those circumstances it would be, he considered, almost impossible to get any person of standing in a county to act on an association.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHapologised for interrupting the noble Lord, but he might perhaps be allowed to suggest that the noble Lord should allow the House in the first place to dispose of his Amendment, and that when their Lordships came to deal with the question whether Clause 3 should stand part of the Bill, then would be the time to raise the other question upon the general question of finance. He would be quite happy to deal with the matter then, but he thought it would be rather awkward to take it in conjunction with the Amendment now before the House.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDpointed out that if that course were pursued it would be impossible to amend the clause. What they wanted to do was, in the first place, to get answers from the Government in order to see whether it was necessary to move Amendments to the clause.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid that he had no objection, if the House so desired, to having a general discussion of the financial clauses on the present Amendment. It did not really matter at all to the Government, and it was for the House to decide what they would like done. His only object in raising the point had been to prevent the discussion of the same subject twice over.
LORD SALTOUNsaid he had put the Amendment on the Paper because he did not see any other part of the Bill in which the question could be possibly raised. He was quite aware that the title of the clause was "Expenses of the Association," and that that might be called the money clause of the Bill. Still, as that was the only clause on which the subject, as far as he could see, could be 1331 in any way discussed, it had struck him that that was the right moment to bring forward his Amendment. Of course he was in the hands of the House.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEPerhaps I may be allowed to say that we do not at all complain of the course the noble Lord has taken. On the contrary, it seems to me a very good way of raising a discussion on the financial question in the Bill. All that my noble friend the Earl of Portsmouth wished to guard against was having a discussion on the financial question now and having it again later on.
THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREthought it was absolutely unnecessary to guard against what he considered exceedingly unlikely to happen. Because, as this was the only Amendment to the clause, it could hardly be supposed that there would be two discussions upon the same question within a few minutes of each other.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEI am not at all sure that there is not great danger of that.
*LORD SALTOUNsaid that he would not detain their Lordships long; but he had thought it his duty to bring up the subject. He would be glad to hear what the Under-Secretary for War had to tell them upon a subject which was felt to be most important by a great number of people. It was quite certain that if a man gave his services to the public he ought to be guarded against having to put his hand into his pocket in order to relieve the association or the War Office. He thought there should be some statement from the Under-Secretary for War as to what he really meant by the Answers which he had given on the previous evening, which, on the face of them, it was absolutely impossible for him (Lord Saltoun) to understand, and which the Leader of the Opposition himself seemed unable to make head or tail of. He had been asked by Lord Blythswood to say that on the Report stage he proposed to move an Amendment—
That no pecuniary liability should attach to any member of an association carrying out the duties imposed by this Act.1332 Lord Blythswood had been obliged to leave the House, and had asked him just to mention his (Lord Blythswood's) intention. He did not know if it was in order to put it down, and he would content himself with simply stating that Lord Blythswood proposed to take that course. In conclusion he would like to hear from the Under-Secretary for War that the members of these associations would be cleared from all expenses incidental to the associations.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 4, line 29, to leave out in the opinion of the Army Council." — (Lord Saltoun.)
§ *LORD HAVERSHAMwished to mention a concrete instance which, he thought, would shew the noble Lord that he was under considerable misapprehension with regard to the money that would be paid to these local associations. In the preceding clause the county associations had to provide and maintain rifle ranges and so on. It was not supposed that out of the £75 per company they could do anything of that sort; and if his noble friend would consult the Army Estimates he would see that there was a sum of £467,000 voted by Parliament for the establishment and maintenance of rifle ranges amongst other things. The words in the clause now under discussion were—
The Army Council shall pay to an association, out of money voted by Parliament for Army services, such sums,and so on. The money would have been voted by Parliament, and all that he imagined this Bill would do was to authorise the paying over to the new associations of any money which might be locally spent by them. He thought that was quite a different thing from what his noble friend was alluding to with regard to the £75 per company. Of course, that was a sum which they would have to use for the particular purposes stated in their budget. They had to send up every year to the Army Council a budget of all their requirements, and if there was any particular requirement which would cost a good deal of money, he was informed officially that they would have to make a 1333 particular demand for it, and then that demand would be considered. At the same time it was supposed that their ordinary expenses would be covered by the amount granted per company. Whether that was so or not, he did not know; but the County Associations would have to put down every item in their budget, which would be very carefully examined into by the Finance Department of the War Office, and subsequently passed by the local auditors.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDsaid that if he understood the Bill rightly there were two sources of income which these associations were to have which might be devoted to the purposes mentioned in the Bill. Rifle ranges were mentioned in the Bill, and he understood from the noble Lord (Lord Haversham) that rifle ranges were not to come out of the £75 per company. If that was so, it was very interesting to know it. But what he would submit was that the Undersecretary of State for War should lay upon the Table of the House, if possible, something like a draft scheme of expenditure, and so let them know what was and what was not to come out of the £75, and who was to be liable for any miscarriage of funds. He apologised to the House for speaking so often, but the questions upon this clause wore really the same questions as those which arose on the former clause; and the inquiries he was now about to make were really a continuation and a part of the inquiries he had made upon the former clause. The first question he wished to ask the noble Lord was that which he had just stated, namely, could he give them some estimate of the receipts and expenditure of an average County Association? What would be i the necessary and unavoidable expenses of that association? He had just jotted down one or two things which had occurred to him. First there would be the rent of the offices, and in some large towns good offices were very often expensive places to rent. Then there would be the salary of the secretary. The secretary was to be a gentleman, as he understood, of high standing; he was to be accountable (whatever that meant) to the Army Council; he was to be 1334 appointed by the Army Council, and he was to be the medium of communication between the Army Council and the association. It struck him very strongly that if that were really the case the secretary would really be the association, because he would evidently have the ear of the Army Council. He would have morally, if not actually, the control of the purse. He could not see that there was very much left for the association to do. The salary of the secretary, he imagined, would be a fairly considerable one. Many officials of county councils received £600 or £800 a year, and sometimes more, and he supposed it would be something of that calibre which the secretary of this association would expect. Then the secretary would want an army of clerks. Had the Government really considered what some of the duties which they imposed upon the association meant? There was one in Subsection (e) for instance—
Arranging with employers of labour as to holidays for training, and ascertaining the times of training best suited to the circumstances of civil life.What an amount of correspondence and of interviews that would necessitate! Then Subsection (L) dealt with the care of reservists and discharged soldiers. He had had some experience of that, and of the enormous amount of correspondence and inquiries entailed thereby. Indeed, he thought that if they were to provide properly for discharged soldiers they would have to have some organisation of visitors who would see the men in their homes, as the Charity Organisation did, and test their accounts and so on. All that meant work for the officials. He would not detain the House by going through all the various matters in detail, but he might extend such examples to almost any extent. Taking the various subsections of Clause 2, what did they mean? They meant an amount of clerical work, to mention no other, which was simply stupendous. Then there would be travelling expenses for officials—they would have to do a certain amount of travelling about looking after the discharged soldiers, interviewing employers, and doing other business. He had also put down on his list "Stationery and Postage"; that might sound trivial to some of their Lordships, but he did not 1335 know that it would be such a very small amount when it came to be totalled up, with the books and everything which would be required. Then they would have to provide for the care of the offices; and, altogether, he wished to ask the Government whether they had made any estimate of any sort or kind as to what the expenditure of the association under such heads as those would be. He was quite aware that the Government might answer that they had not decided exactly what work they were going to put upon the associations, that these clauses were merely permissive, and that they could not tell what the cost would be until they had decided how much they intended to avail themselves of the powers which Parliament was to entrust them with. That, of course, was perfectly true, but there must be limits to it. The Government seemed to be in the position of a man who was asking an architect what it would cost to build a hospital; and when the architect asked how large the hospital was to be, he was told: "I don't know how many beds there will be; I cannot tell you yet." The architect says, "What sort of sum have you got to spend on the hospital?" and the reply he receives is, "Oh, a ten-pound note." It was quite clear that that would be inadequate; and that was, it seemed to him, exactly the position of the Government in this matter. He thought the House might possibly be given some indication that such-and-such duties were to be undertaken by the County Associations, that their cost would be so much, that there would be so many duties, and so on. He wanted to ask a j question which seemed to him of vital importance to everyone who was to be on one of these associations: What was to happen if the expenditure of the association exceeded its income? There was nothing more likely, because it was going to undertake an absolutely new work; it had got to feel its way, and a good deal of pressure would be put upon it from various sources for expenditure. What was to happen, supposing there was a miscalculation? And, out of that arose another question that he wished to put to the noble Lord. The noble Lord had spoken yesterday of the corporate liability of the association. What did "corporate liability" mean in that 1336 connection? As far as he understood, all corporations which had corporate liability either had property of their own, which they might sell if they got into debt, or they had powers of raising a rate, or they had both opportunities. But what was the corporate liability of an association which had no property at all? It did not mean the liability of the individuals, because that would not be a corporate liability. Then, what was the liability? Finally, he wished to ask a question which arose out of the debate upon the previous clause. From what sources was the association to expect money, if any, other than that supplied to it from the Department of the Government? He did not wish to raise the old argument about privilege, but the whole contention that that was a breach of privilege depended upon the fact that the money which was being dealt with under that clause was derived from grants by Parliament; and that would lead one to the conclusion that the only matters which the association had to deal with were grants by Parliament. He wanted to put the question in this form. It had been said yesterday that a great deal had been done in the past by generous individuals in respect of Volunteer corps and other branches of the local Forces. Supposing an enthusiastic and patriotic-individual chose to give to an association some money to be spent on, say, drilling boys under the age of sixteen, was he to be capable of doing that, or was he not? That would not be money derived from Parliament. He would have thought there was nothing more likely than that somebody in a county who felt very strongly with the gallant Field Marshal who had spoken so eloquently in favour of training boys, some sympathiser with that view, should give money to an association for that purpose. Would that be lawful or would it not? What were the sources—that really was his question put shortly—what were the sources of income which an association was to look to; what was it probable the money derived from those various sources would amount to: what was the probable expenditure of the association; and, finally, what was the liability of the association, supposing they should outrun their income?
LORD RAGLANsaid that the difficulty he saw with regard to the money was this: First of all, the clause now under consideration was really the entire Bill, and all the rest was practically merely accessory. To those who, like himself, might find themselves in the position of being president of one of these associations, it. was a matter of very great importance; because, first of all, the information they had received on the subject was extraordinarily vague; and, secondly, they did not know to what claims against them it might lead. There were only two points which he should like to put to the noble Lord the Under-Secretary for War with regard to this expenditure. In the first place, there was the question of the £75 per company. That sum was mentioned in an exceedingly airy manner, and they had been told, "Oh! £75 a company!" He wanted to know what that £75 was. Was it a maximum; that was to say, that no company would ever get more than £75? Or was it a minimum; that was to say, that no company would ever get less than £75? Or was it the average sum which would be spread out over all the companies, some getting more, and some getting less, but the £75 being the average of the amounts which the whole of the associations would receive? The expenses of administering the Act would vary most amazingly between county and county, and still more between regiment and regiment. For instance, if they took a compact urban battalion of Volunteers, of which the whole of the men lived within a mile of their headquarters, and compared the expenses of such a battalion with the expenses of a rural battalion, with its companies scattered up and down a county running perhaps to hundreds of square miles, they would find that there would be an enormous additional expense in the latter case by the attempt to organise it up to anything approaching the efficiency of an urban corps. He would also like to know what the word "organisation" meant in the phrase "organisation of the units of the Territorial Force." Did the words "organisation of units" mean merely the formation, or did it mean the general administration of those units: because the word "adminis- 1338 tration" was used after that—"and their administration." Surely the War Office had in their minds some sort of idea of what they thought it would cost to organise and administer an ordinary average battalion consisting of the ordinary number of companies, say, from eight to ten. He thought the House ought to be told whether or not some sort of idea was in the minds of the War Office as to what the actual cost was to be.
VISCOUNT ESHERwished to ask the noble Earl whether His Majesty's Government was in any way bound to the figure of £75 per company, or whether that was anything more than a rough estimate of the probable expenditure of the Territorial Army?
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHclaimed the indulgence of the House for going into the rather difficult question of figures, and said that perhaps before replying to the various questions put to him (which he would endeavour to answer so far as he could follow them) it might be to the convenience of the House if he gave their Lordships, rather in layman's language, an account of what the financial position would be under the clause. This clause had been the subject of a great deal of scrutiny and examination in the House of Commons; and it had been drawn up very carefully in negotiation with the Treasury. Under the present régime the commanding officer in a Yeomanry or Volunteer regiment received the whole of the funds which had been earned by his corps, and was solely responsible for administering his corps on those grants, supplemented by any private funds which might be forthcoming. That was a financial responsibility which had pressed very heavily on many commanding officers, and one of the benefits and advantages of the present Bill was that it removed that condition of things as far as possible. In future the War Office would have no financial dealings with the officer commanding a unit; the whole cost of training and instruction corresponding to the present camp and school grants would be met by the general commanding officer from funds allotted to him by the War Office; and the 1339 financial administration of the corps during the rest of the year would devolve upon the associations, and not upon the commanding officers. He did not know whether their Lordships had seen a Parliamentary Paper which had been for some time circulated, Cd. 3296; it was a very technical Paper, and probably even if their Lordships saw it they might require to have had almost the experience of an accountant in order to make it out. But in that Parliamentary Paper the sums allotted to the associations for defraying the cost of the administration of units in each year would be based on, firstly, a grant per unit to meet the expenses which did not vary with the strength—those embraced general administrative expenses and the upkeep of drill halls, but did not include, necessarily, such things as rifle ranges; and, secondly, on grants per man to meet the cost of clothing and travel. The War Office would pay over every year to the associations the grants earned under those two heads, the distribution of those funds among the various units being left entirely to the discretion of the association. The grant for general administrative expenses was based upon the actual average expenditure of past years, a margin having been allowed for the administrative expenses of associations, which it was hoped would be kept at a minimum. The grant for clothing was based upon the actual cost of clothing, and the grants for headquarters, travelling and so forth would be based upon actual requirements. Commanding officers of the Territorial Force would be relieved of the financial responsibility which in the past had so heavily pressed upon them. As ordinary members of a sub-committee of the association, they might be called upon to administer such portions of the grant as the association might find it necessary to delegate to them, but even in such cases the responsibility would rest with the association. As had been explained in another place, the corps would be handed over to the associations as going concerns in a sound financial condition— that was to say, such debts outstanding at the time of transition as were not due to extravagant and unauthorised administration would be met out of public funds. Those were, as far as he was able 1340 to give them to their Lordships, the general outlines of what the effect of the clause and of the Government's proposals would be. The Duke of Northumberland had put to him certain questions which he would endeavour to the best of his ability to answer as specifically as he could, as also the question put by Lord Esher. The noble Duke had asked whether the Government could give him an estimate of the cost of these associations. He was afraid it would really be impossible at present to give any estimate of the receipts and administrative expenses of average County Associations as distinct from the expenditure now dealt with by commanding officers of Volunteer units. They had heard a great deal about the £75 grant. Lord Raglan had remarked that he (the Earl of Portsmouth) had "airily" mentioned it. The £75 grant appeared in the Paper to which he had already referred (Cd. 3296) of Sir Guy Fleetwood Wilson. It was therefore not a mere casual sum. The £75 grant for which provision had been made in the Estimates would, they hoped, provide some margin to meet such expenditure; but until the associations themselves were in a position to indicate the requirements of their special localities, he was afraid, after having made very careful inquiries, that any Departmental Estimate would prove very misleading. It was a very important point, and one which would of course be very carefully considered when the scheme of each association came to be developed. Judging from what had been said, there appeared to have been a general idea that this £75 grant per company was a sort of fixed and hard and rigid sum, whereas the administrative grant of £75 per company was only an estimate based upon past experience, and he would like to take that opportunity of stating — as he was glad to do—that it was fully recognised by the Government that that sum might have to be varied in different cases, and that if it was not sufficient in any particular case, the necessary expenses of the association would have to be provided for to a larger extent from public funds. He hoped that that explanation had made the point quite clear. Then there was another point—he did not know 1341 whether it had been in the mind of the noble Duke, but one or two other gentlemen had written to him about it—and that was the question of what he might call the running account. In the event of the expenditure of an association exceeding its income, no cash settlement at the end of the year would be insisted upon by the War Office—they felt that they could not impose strict Treasury conditions in that respect in regard to these associations—but the liability would have to be taken into account by the association in disposing of its income during the following year.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDasked who was to bear the liability. The noble Lord had said that the liability must be taken into account. Was it a personal liability of the members of the association, or was it a corporate liability, and if the latter, what did corporate liability mean?
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he was rather glad that the noble Duke had asked him that question, because, as he had foreseen that in all human probability he himself might possibly, in the future, be a member of one of these associations, he had been very anxious to know what his own liability was going to be, and he had taken as keen an interest in the matter, and was as desirous of obtaining some satisfactory assurance on that point, as any of his noble friends on the other side of the House. With regard to what was a ''corporate liability," although he was a lawyer, he was afraid he could not describe to the House exactly what that was, but he had made himself perfectly satisfied upon the point—which he was bound to say was good enough for him— as regarded his own position as a member of one of these associations; he had satisfied himself that no individual member of an association would be pecuniarily liable in any respect except in the case of fraud. He wished to apologise to their Lordships for having gone into these details of what he was afraid was an exceedingly difficult question. Before sitting down he would like to deal with the merits of the Amendment nominally before the House.
§ *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEI would like to say just a word before the 1342 noble Earl proceeds to deal with that question.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDasked whether it would be convenient for him to put a question now or afterwards.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHconfessed that questions were never very convenient in these matters when they were thrown across the Table, but if the noble Duke put a question, he would answer it to the best of his ability.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDsaid it was extremely satisfactory to all of them who might hereafter be presidents of these associations to know that they were not pecuniarily liable, but the question still returned upon him, Who was liable? Where was the deficit, if any, to come from?
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsuggested that the noble Duke might put that question with greater effect to the noble Lord upon the Woolsack, who he regretted was not there at the moment.
§ *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEThe noble Lord has made a determined effort to remove a part of the obscurity which pervades this portion of the Bill, but I am afraid he has not been entirely successful in enlightening us. I should like to ask him, omitting all details, and in quite a general way, whether we rightly understand the procedure which will be followed with regard to the financial arrangements of these County Associations. I gather that every year each of the County Associations will have to prepare a kind of budget of its own. That budget will go up to the War Office, and will there be examined and revised by the Army Council. Upon these figures collectively Parliament will be asked to vote money in the Army Estimates. That money will be allocated by the Army Council county by county. Each association will then have to distribute its own grant, making that grant go as far as it can; and then I understand the noble Earl to tell us, that if, as seems only too likely (because we know that estimates which go up to the War Office are always 1343 cut down), the sum placed by the War Office at the disposal of the association is not sufficient to meet the necessary expenditure connected with the exercise and discharge by the association of its duties and powers, then will come the last act in the drama: the association sends the hat round for the deficit. I take it that is what will happen. The noble Earl vouch-safes further this information, which is interesting—that the association will have the privilege of running into debt at the end of the year, but the deficit will have eventually to be made good out of the grant of the following year. That is what I gathered from the noble Earl.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEMay have to be made good.
§ *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEMay have to be made good, if there is a deficit. That is the source to which the association will have to look, if there is a deficit—to the next year's grant. Is that so?
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEYes.
§ *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEI am much obliged.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid that now that he had, as far as possible, made clear what was rather a difficult matter, he might perhaps be allowed to deal with the terms of the Amendment of Lord Saltoun. Lord Saltoun proposed to leave out the words "in the case of the Army Council." That was an Amendment which he was afraid it would not be possible for them to accept, because the effect of the Amendment would be to destroy the control over Army expenditure which the Army Council must necessarily retain in their hands subject to the general control of the Treasury, as set forth in Subsections (3) and (6) of the clause. The statements submitted by the various associations would, of course, like all other items of expenditure, be reviewed by the Army Council before inclusion in the Army Estimates. He hoped his noble friend would not press the Amendment. It was a very singular thing that a similar Amendment was 1344 moved in the House of Commons under the mistaken idea that it was to have the effect of bringing the control of Parliament more directly to bear upon the money to be given to these associations. He regretted that His Majesty's Government could not accept the Amendment. Was it the intention of the noble Lord to press it?
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDsaid that the noble Lord (Lord Saltoun) had been obliged to leave the House, I but had asked him to say that he was not desirous of pressing his Amendment. He would like to remind the noble Lord that he had not yet answered the question which he had put to him as to whether a patriotic individual desiring to subscribe money for the drilling of boys below the age of sixteen would be allowed to do it.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEPerhaps I might answer that question. The restriction, as the noble Lord will see, applies only to schools in receipt of a Parliamentary grant, and I suppose the noble Lord means by his question, could boys belonging to a school in receipt of a grant be drilled if the money for doing so was privately subscribed.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDThrough an association.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEIt could not be done through an association according to the terms of the Bill, unless, of course the Amendment which has just been negatived was allowed to stand. Further than that, it would undoubtedly be a matter for the Beard of Education to decide as to whether they would allow such drilling to take place.
§ *VISCOUNT MIDLETONsaid that before leaving the subject of expenses he thought there was a great deal which still required clearing up, and although he did not desire to detain their Lordships a single moment unnecessarily, he would urge upon the Government whether it was not possible to lay upon the Table of the House some sort of estimate of what this £75 was intended to cover. So far as he knew, a sum of £2:25,000 was taken in all. That represented a sum of £75 1345 per company or thereabouts, as far as he could calculate. When they came to put down the large charges which were involved in sub-section (c) for the provision and maintenance of rifle ranges, buildings, magazines, and so forth, those were very serious charges, and when the noble Earl toll them that the general administration expenses would be taken at the cost at which they had hitherto been, he thought, although it was very fair that should be considered, that they would find that there were very great divergencies in the different corps, and that the cost to the country would be something infinitely greater than the noble Earl had any idea of. There was one other point which had not been taken up, and which he would urge the Government to consider. If they were to pass these words," in the opinion of the Army Council''—which, of course, he quite realised must under the circumstances stand in the Bill—every single item of expenditure which the associations undertook must first be referred to the Army Council before they could undertake it, if they were to get the money refunded. Had their Lordships considered what would be the amount of correspondence between these various small War Offices and the main parent body if every item that had finally to be passed by the Army Council was to be discussed by letter between the secretary and the Army Council? He thought that it would be a good thing if some plan could be devised—and if they could see the Government scheme, he thought that perhaps they might help to devise it— by which a sum which really would cover the expenses in all cases—or should cover the expenses in all cases—should be allotted so that each individual item should not be made a matter of discussion. One point had interested him very much in the noble Earl's remarks. He had made what seemed to him the very singular observation that if the associations outran their income, the Army Council would not insist upon a cash settlement during that year. But the difficulty would be that the associations would have over-spent their money; it would not be a question of a cash settlement upon which the Army Council would insist, but of a cash settlement without which the associations would be 1346 bankrupt. There was no individual, liability; there was no power to borrow; the associations had only two sources of funds—what the Army Council granted to them under this clause, and what they could raise, as his noble friend (the Duke-of Northumberland) had said, by sending the hat round. What he feared was that too much of the time of these associations would be taken up in communicating with the War Office on the one hand as to what they might do, and,. on the other hand, in sending out petitions broadcast to everyone in the county who had got money to spare to relieve-them of some portion of a liability which they would otherwise undertake. They might not be able to do more than urge it upon the Government, but in the interest of the Government and of these schemes which they were going to put out, he thought it would be highly desirable for them to draw up for their Lordships some sort of model scheme for a battalion, or for an association, which would give some idea of whether the sum involved would be adequate to meet the needs of the association, and if not, show how those needs were to be met other than by appeals to the public, which the noble Earl had assured them it was not the desire of the Government should be-made.
§ *LORD RIBBLESDALEsaid he would leave his noble friends below him to say whether the Government would be prepared to draw up the scheme with the various model regulations and requirements which he understood the noble Viscount to say he thought would be desirable. Although he had served for some years in the Army he did not intervene in the debate on that ground, but because the establishment of these County Associations must naturally bring in an extremely civilian complexion and many civilian considerations into the whole discussion of the Bill. That, he thought everybody would bear witness, had amply appeared in the course of the debate so far as it had gone. He was certain that noble Lords below him who represented His Majesty's Government would be the very last people to complain that noble Lords opposite and noble Lords on their 1347 own side had pressed them hard for a great many details. The Committee stage of a Bill was the right moment at which to bring forward those details in their most pungent form, and as far as possible to insist on answers to any questions which might arise. He agreed that some of the answers which had been given had not, perhaps, illuminated them very much, but he was certain that that was really not any fault of the noble Lord (the Earl of Portsmouth) or of the Government. It was inherent in a scheme of this sort that they must apply to it that motto which always was applied so successfully to English affairs, "solvitur ambulando," and a great many of the questions which had been asked could not be answered in the detailed terms in which those of their Lordships who were likely to have something to do hereafter with these County Associations, or who might possibly have to put their hands into their pockets to make good some of the deficiencies which might arise out of the conduct of affairs by these County Associations, would have liked to have had them answered. They all wanted to have questions answered and details given which he did not think they were likely to get answered or given. But he would recall the House to two main considerations. If he might say so, without imparting any sort of personal colour into the matter, he thought a good deal of what they had been listening to was what he would call "fears of the brave and follies of the wise." He believed himself that the whole reputation of the Army Council was bound up in the efficiency and the success of this scheme. He believed that the whole reputation of the Government was bound up in its economic—using the word in the sense of economy and thrift—administration. Under those circumstances he thought they must walk a little by faith, and believe that on the one hand the Army would not be starved by the Army Council, and, on the other hand, that they would not be put to any very great expense in connection with these County Associations. Perhaps he might put it in this way—that he did not think either that the Army would be starved or that money would be wasted under the proposals of the Government, for the reasons that on the one 1348 side they had the Army Council, whose reputation was bound up in efficiency, and on the other hand they had the success of the Government, which was bound up in producing a scheme which would secure that the Army should be conducted on economic and business principles.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUinquired whether the noble Earl could tell him in the case of cadet corps which were not connected with schools if the provision in Subsection (2) (f) of Clause 2 would apply. He knew that in Harrow, for instance, such corps would not be affected, because they did not receive public grants, but he was thinking of a cadet corps such as he had in his own battalion—a cadet corps not necessarily in a school, but in a town, and consisting of boys of about sixteen. Were such corps affected by this provision, or would they get a grant?
*LORD HARRISdesired to say a few words by way of warning to His Majesty's Government. He did not think what had already been said with regard to the amount of correspondence which would take place between the Army Council and the County Associations had anything like exhausted that interesting subject. There would be an entirely new subject for correspondence, viz., what the colonels spent in clothing and administration. At present it was, he imagined, the one outlay of the War Office in which red tape did not come in. The sum was handed over, whatever it might be, to an officer commanding a unit, and he spent it within the lines which had been laid down in the regulations. Those lines were very liberal, and the commanding officer was allowed to dispose of the money with great freedom. All that was to be done away with. He did not blame the War Office in the least for taking this liability off the shoulders of commanding officers, because he was perfectly aware that commanding officers had constantly grumbled at it. But that was all going to be done away with, and upon every item of expenditure that the officer commanding a unit washed to undertake there would be 1349 correspondence with the County Association. They all knew the trite example of how much was spent—he thought it was something like 7s. 6d.—in correspondence on the sewing of a button on to the tunic of a soldier. It was constantly quoted, he remembered, some years ago. That was an instance of red tape, and it seemed to him extremely probable that the same kind of thing was going to happen here, and that he, for instance, would not be able to get a trooper's overall altered by the local tailor without having a correspondence with the County Association. Upon every item included under the heads which had been mentioned by the noble Earl—expenditure on clothing, expenditure on drill halls, expenditure on rifle ranges, and so on — there would be correspondence of a more or less voluminous character. That had all got to be added to the correspondence which his noble friend on the Front Bench had referred to. He only mentioned this to show the noble Earl that it was an amount of correspondence which the War Office at present had no means of calculating, because at present it was done entirely by commanding officers of units, who very often paid for the correspondence out of their own pockets, and the volume of it was known only to themselves, and not to any War Office officials. All that was outside the means of calculation of the War Office at the present time, and therefore he threw this out as a warning to the noble Earl as a matter which he had to take into consideration, and ventured to think that he might find the expense of the County Associations in clerical matters, both as to personnel and also as to pens, ink and paper, a good deal more than he at present imagined.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause 3 agreed to.
§ Clause 4:—
LORD LOVATmoved an Amendment to Subsection (e), specifying that in regard to the regulations made by the Army Council under this part of the Act for providing by the constitution of joint committees or otherwise for co- 1350 operative action, such co-operative action should be "in the organisation and administration of divisions, brigades, and other military body." He thought that after the discussion they had had, they would probably all agree that the fewer of these County Associations there were the better, and that if the formation of County Associations could be avoided, it would be avoided in a good many cases. He therefore urged His Majesty's Government to accept his Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
On page 5, line 39, after the word 'action' to insert 'in the organisation and administration of divisions, brigades, and other military body.' "—(Lord Lovat.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he should be very glad to accept the Amendment.
VISCOUNT ESHERasked whether Subsection (c) was really required by His Majesty's Government. He had always understood that one of the great scandals, he might almost say, of the administration of the Volunteers hitherto had been the power vested in commanding officers both to borrow money on their own personal liability and also to mortgage the future grants. He thought it would be a matter of regret if these local associations were to start with similar powers, and he would ask the noble Lord whether that sub-section was really necessary.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHthought that the subsection had better not be dispensed with, because if there was to be a question of mortgaging future grants, it would have to be considered in connection with the regulations which the Government proposed to make under this paragraph. Under the circumstances he thought it better to leave the subsection in.
§ Clause 5:—
LORD LOVATmoved an Amendment to ensure that the number of men 1351 provided for by Parliament in the Territorial Forces at the passing of the Act should be not less than the number of men actually in the Auxiliary Forces prior to the passing of the Bill. He said he brought the Amendment forward not with any view of pressing it, but to extract certain information from His Majesty's Government as to what our Home defence would be after the passing of the Bill. At the present moment there were in the Auxiliary Forces—at all events on paper—500,000 men. In other words, that was the establishment. As a matter of fact, all the men available for the defence of the country were some 336,000. Under the new Act there would be as the establishment 300,000, or, to be more correct, perhaps 313,000 men. If they took the proportion of men to establishment in "the existing Auxiliary Forces—that was to say, three-fourths, or 336,000 to 470,000—and three-fourths of the expected establishment, namely, three-fourths of 313,000, they would' find that they would have something between 220,000 and 230,000 responsible for the defence of the country. That defence might be roughly divided under two heads, those men who had to take up the local defences, coast defence, and the defence of those places which must be held and in which men were placed at the beginning of a war and must remain until the war was over. He did not pretend to know, and if he did he certainly should not state, what that number was, but it was generally reckoned by military writers, including German writers, to be something between 115,000 and 200,000. Taking the mean of those two figures it meant that under existing circumstances there were at the present moment something in the neighbourhood of 180,000 men for our defences, while under the new scheme for the mobile force for the defence of this country we should have no more than 50,000 to 70,000 at the outside. He would ask their Lordships whether that was enough to reckon on for Home defence. He was not now going to enter into the possibilities of invasion or what landings could be effected. He knew the noble Lord opposite held some strictly confined views on the subject, but he would like to ask if he were correct in his view that the outside 1352 limit for mobile Home defence was some thing between 50,000 and 70,000, granting that the proportion of establishment to numbers which held good in the past would presumably hold good in the future. He thought they must accept as an absolute certainty that with any army on a voluntary principle they could never get absolutely up to establishment. The noble Earl did not perhaps quite believe that, but he could tell him as one running a couple of Yeomanry regiments that it was perfectly impossible from one day to the next to be absolutely certain of what their strength was. Men came and went. They had the right, of course, of leaving at short notice, and they did not notify the fact until the last moment before the training that they intended to leave, and the commanding officer did not hear probably that they had gone to Canada until they had been there a month. There was never any hope of an army recruited on a voluntary basis being kept up to establishment. They must allow for at least 10 per cent., and moreover, there was the certainty that, in the division of units in a way they thought rather arbitrary, where they got a full unit and more than enough recruits in one place, in another place they did not get half up to strength. That had always been the past experience, and presumably it would remain so. He would not enter into the question of efficiency, although it might be pressed, but that there would be certainly something in the same nature as at present he thought practically admitted of no doubt. He would ask the noble Earl whether, say, 1.50,000 to 200,000 for local or strong place defences taken off the 313,000, which was to be the total number for Home defence, was sufficient for the defences of this country? He was perfectly well aware that he could be met in part by the argument that in one case he was counting the Militia and in the other he was not. But they could not have their cake and eat it. The Government claimed to make a better defence for abroad than before, and therefore, they could not count these men among those for the defence of the Home country. He thought when they came to consider that they had taken off regular battalions in the past, that they had reduced the number 1353 of Artillery, that they were going to knock off twenty-three regiments of Militia, and, so far as he could see, sixty-one battalions of Volunteers, and although concessions had been made to the Yeomanry, they were going to reduce their numbers also, and when in addition they realised the importance of the questions asked on the subject of the Navy. by Lord Cawdor the other day, he thought the question of the defence of this country was one to which insufficient attention had been given. He would like to ask the noble Earl—and he hoped he would at least answer this particular question—whether he considered the small mobile force, distinct from the number required for local defences, for the whole of England, Ireland, and Scotland, was sufficient to meet the requirements which might be put upon it.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 6, line 27, after the word ' Parliament' to insert the words 'Provided always that the number of men provided for by Parliament, in the Territorial Forces at the passing of the Act shall be not less than the .number of men actually in the Auxiliary Forces prior to the passing of such Act.' "— (Lord Lovat.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he did not want to appear to be discourteous to his noble friend, but it was quite impossible for him casually to discuss across the Table the question of the number of men which, in his opinion, were or were not necessary in regard to the very complex subject of Home defence. That was a question which if it was to be decided could only be decided after consultation with and on the advice of the Committee of Imperial Defence, and he could only on this occasion ask their Lordships to consider the actual effect of the Amendment which the noble Lord had moved. The effect of that Amendment, which he hoped his noble friend would not press upon the House, would be to put a minimum limit to the number of men to be voted by Parliament for the Territorial Forces. The actual numbers of the Regular Forces and Militia were at present annually fixed by Parliament, and the old constitutional reason and practice were to prevent the Crown exceeding that number. In the case of the Yeomanry and Volunteers, whose 1354 services were regarded as purely voluntary, there never had been any limit fixed to their numbers, and the money voted had the practical effect of restricting the number to be raised. The only result of the Amendment would be to prevent any reduction in the numbers of the Territorial Forces below the actual numbers of the Volunteers and Yeomanry. According to the figures which he had the numbers at the present moment stood at 280,000. Even if this Amendment were carried it would not have the effect of binding Parliament, because Parliament could override it next year by the Appropriation Act or any other Act by which the numbers of the Territorial Force were fixed. It was quite impossible for the Government to accept this Amendment, which moreover would not have the effect which it apparently was intended to have.
§ THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHI am not in a position to give a categorical answer to that question.
LORD LOVATsaid that that was information which their Lordships ought to press for, because it was one of the most important subjects touched by the Bill. They must presume that His Majesty's Government were going to give the country for home defence a sufficient number of men not only to defend the strong places and the coast, but also to give a residue for mobile columns in the country, and he ventured to state that the outside limit of numbers they could expect was not more than from 50,000 to 70,000.
THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREsaid he would like to draw attention to the position in which they found themselves. The Under-Secretary's attitude evidently was that he was unwilling to put in the Bill a provision which attempted to bind future Parliaments with reference to this matter.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid the object of the Amendment, if carried, would be to fix the minimum number of 1355 men. They could not do that by a provision in this Bill. It would practically be overridden to-morrow by the Appropriation Act.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUasked if the noble Earl would give the information asked for by Lord Lovat.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid it was not in his power.
§ LORD MONTAGU Of BEAULIEUsaid that perhaps on Third Reading the noble Earl would be able to tell their Lordships what number would be available for the defence of this country.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid it was quite impossible for him to give any undertaking of that kind.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause 5 agreed to.
§ Clause 6:—
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUmoved an Amendment providing that an order might be issued with respect to the government, discipline, pay, "and allowances" of the Territorial Force. He said he did not think the House had had any statement as to pay and allowances to be given to the force, and perhaps the noble Earl could tell them whether they would be the same as they had been accustomed to. He understood that in future there was to be eight days training for the Territorial Army, and he took it the Government wished to give the same pay and allowances as had been given hitherto. He really put down the Amendment to elicit that from the noble Earl, and to ask whether there would be any change in camp allowance, rates in lieu of pay, and other details.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 6, line 32, after the word 'pay,' to insert the words 'and allowances.' "—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu).
§ THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he was quite prepared to accept the Amendment.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUCan the noble Earl give any information?
§ THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHI can not give you details.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUmoved an Amendment providing that the orders issued might provide, among other things, "for the appointment of a Regular adjutant" and for the constitution of a. permanent staff, "including adjutants and staff-sergeants, who shall be members of His Majesty's Regular Forces." He said that this was rather an important Amendment. The noble Earl, he believed, could reassure those who believed in the future of the Territorial Army on this point, which was that this force should be allowed to have Regular adjutants and staff-sergeants as at present. There was, he thought, an idea at one time that they should be called upon to provide their own adjutants, which in some cases might work well, but he believed Mr. Haldane had stated that the adjutants would be selected as at present, and if the noble Earl could give him an assurance it would meet the object of the Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 7, line 5, after the word 'provide' to insert the words 'for the appointment of a regular adjutant and.' "—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid that he could not accept this Amendment or the next.† He would take both. Amendments together, as they applied to the same question, and the same objection applied to both. The Government were not in a position to accept the Amendments because they dealt with matters in regard to which they could not tie their hands by Act of Parliament. To attempt to do so might, and probably
† The Amendment referred to proposed that the orders issued under Clause 6 might provide for the constitution of a permanent staff, "including adjutants of His Majesty's Regular Forces.1357 would, dislocate all the training arrangements. The Army Council had no present intention to dispense with the Regular adjutants, but they could not tie their hands in the way suggested by the Amendment. Very possibly in the future it might be that the employment of members of the trained staff of the third and fourth battalions and instructors of the Territorial Forces would enable the Army Council to dispense to some extent with the services of the adjutants and staff-sergeants.
§ *VISCOUNT MIDLETONdid not think the noble Earl had quite appreciated the force of the clause. The clause was only permissive, but it gave a sort of rechauffé of what the intentions of the Government were. The noble Earl would recall that in the other House of Parliament the Secretary of State gave an under taking to provide Regular adjutants to these corps, and, in order merely to carry out the actual proposal in the Paper which had been laid on the Table by the right hon. Gentleman in the other House, it was highly desirable to bring this clause into concurrence with the provision for a permanent staff and also for the appointment of Regular adjutants By this use of the word "may" it was still left in the power of the Government to advise His Majesty whether it should or should not be done, and he thought under the circumstances, seeing that the matter had been made the subject already of a Parliamentary statement which was practically a Parliamentary pledge, the noble Earl would only be showing a want of confidence in what had already been done if he refused to allow it to be placed in the Bill.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEWith regard to the second Amendment, is not the force of the permissive word "may" somewhat diminished by the phrase "adjutants and staff-sergeants who shall be members of His Majesty's Regular forces?" It seems to me that if those words are included it may be taken to be very much like a permanent injunction to make them always members of the Regular forces.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid it was quite true that the object was to 1358 give the opportunity to the Army Council to appoint these Regular adjutants and for Parliament to indicate to the country that that was what was contemplated. As his noble friend had just pointed out, there was no desire absolutely to bind the Army Council, as the word "may" and not "shall" was used; but he was convinced that if the Government persisted in refusing this Amendment it would be conceived in the country that they had gone back upon the position which they took up recently in the House of Commons. It would be thought that after the country had been informed that the adjutancies were to be properly maintained the Government had, on second thoughts, come to the conclusion that perhaps they ought not to be maintained. Did the Government desire to produce that impression in the country? It would be a most disastrous impression,, because he was perfectly certain, though he was not himself a Volunteer, from his knowledge of the subject that it would be quite impossible to carry on the Volunteer service properly unless it had these adjutants. The noble Earl had said that perhaps in the future it might be found possible to detach an officer from the staff of the Militia to take over the duties of adjutant of the Volunteer force. He could not congratulate the noble Earl upon that suggestion. He thought it would be very inconvenient for the special Reservists, and exceedingly unpopular with the Territorial Force. But he need not argue the point, because it came within the terms of the Amendment that the adjutant would be a Regular officer within the meaning of the Amendment. He had invited the Government not to expose themselves to the undoubted suspicion which would be created by their action if they refused this Amendment. It would be thought throughout the country that the idea of maintaining the Regular adjutants in the Territorial Force had been abandoned. He was afraid they could not be parties to such a change of front, if it was to be made.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he really did not think the noble Marquess had any justification for supposing they would make a change of front, but he 1359 could not accept this Amendment without further consultation. He was advised that it would have a different effect from what the noble Lord supposed. If, however, he found that it could be inserted at a later stage, he would insert it. At the present moment, however, he could not accept it.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUsaid in this case they felt very strongly indeed that the Territorial Army, which they would all try loyally to make a success, would not be a success unless they had Regular adjutants and staff-sergeants. He had had an acting-adjutant for some time who was an exceptionally good Volunteer, and if he was not to have a Regular adjutant for his corps he would rather have a Volunteer whom he could select from among his own staff; but he appealed for a Regular adjutant, because they wanted that professional assistance from the Regular adjutant which he thought they ought to have.
§ VISCOUNT MIDLETONhoped the Amendment would be pressed to a division. At the War Office, where he had a good deal of experience in this matter, he was advised over and over again by the Commander in Chief that it was absolutely necessary that the Volunteers should have a Regular adjutant. The Government had admitted that plea by giving a Parliamentary pledge, and it would be most unfortunate if the noble Earl should appear in any way to go back upon it.
§ *EARL ROBERTSsupported what the noble Viscount had said. As Commander-in-Chief he had always insisted that the adjutant of the Volunteers should be a Regular, and as it had been said in the House of Commons that he should be a Regular he could not conceive that there was any objection to inserting the Amendment. He trusted the Amendment would be carried.
§ *LORD HAVERSHAMsaid he believed that an adjutant was included in the permanent staff, and this clause gave the power to appoint a permanent staff.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYWhat is the objection to the Amendment?
§ *LORD HAVERSHAMsaid they never put into an administrative Bill like this actual details of what was to be done by the executive officers at the War Office. It was most unusual to tie their hands in the way proposed by the Amendment, and a particular objection was that it would cut out all the Militia officers, for whom they had been endeavouring for years in the House of Commons to obtain these adjutancies. He could instance in the case of the London Rifle Brigade—practically the best man they ever had as adjutant would have been cut out by this Amendment because he had sold his commission in the Army. Their Lordships had the pledge of the Secretary of State for War and the assurance of his noble friend that what Lord Roberts said would be regarded, and that these adjutants and staff-sergeants from the Army would be preserved as far as possible; but he thought it would be very unfair to tie the hands of the Government by special words in the Bill, and it was certainly quite foreign to the practice of Parliament to include such details in a Bill of this kind, which was of an administrative and not of an executive character.
§ *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEIf the noble Lord supposes the words are merely surplus age they will do no great harm.
§ *LORD HAVERSHAMBut they tie the hands of the Government.
§ *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEI think the clause should contain an indication that in ordinary cases Regular adjutants will be appointed. Let me I point out that the whole clause is governed by the word "may" therefore, it does not put any compulsion upon the military authorities to make these appointments. It is merely an indication that as a rule it is desirable.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWENeither the noble Marquess nor any other noble Lord has touched the point which I ventured to raise, namely, that if you insert the word "may " in the earlier part of the clause it seems very singular drafting to use the word "shall" in the latter part. As "regards the whole question, my noble 1361 friend has said that lie will ask the Secretary of State what his view is as to including some words of this nature at a later stage. I think it is hardly possible to expect my noble friend to go further than this, and under these circumstances I desire to appeal to your Lordships not to divide the House.
THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREsaid he was sure their Lordships were very glad to hear that the Secretary for War would consider these words at a later stage, but he thought they had a right to say that they should have been considered before, and if that had not been done, surely the proper course was to insert the words now and consider them afterwards.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEConsidered in the light of the noble Earl's objections.
THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREThe objections have all been raised by that bench, and surely you have considered them by now.
THE EARL OF ARRANthought that Regular adjutants should be employed, but his view as commanding a battalion, like his noble friend Lord Montagu, was that if they could not have Regular adjutants they would prefer to have them from their own staff.
LORD LUCASsaid he quite saw the point of the noble Viscount and also of the noble Earl, Lord Roberts, who had pointed out the great importance that had hitherto been attached to the appointment of Regular adjutants for Volunteer regiments and the great good that had resulted. At the same time, there had been a great change in the policy to be inaugurated under the new Territorial Army and that was made possible by the new factor of training battalions. It was the intention of the Government, he believed, to try as far as possible a new system of training, which was that, instead of having the instructor attached to the unit, as was the case now, they should try as far as possible to give a very scientific and specialised training to the officers by means of the training machinery which was to be set up, and .then allow them to develop their power of 1362 command by receiving instruction which would enable them to go back to their regiments and command their own men, not under the eye of a permanent man as in the case of the adjutant. He believed that in the view of the General Staff that was most likely to lead to efficiency. It seemed that in trying this new method of training they would render the whole thing nugatory if they insisted, as was done by this Amendment, upon the appointment to the unit of an adjutant who should be a Regular.
THE EARL OF ARRANsaid he had had some small experience both as a junior officer in the Militia and as a commanding officer of Volunteers, and he knew that the deference which was shown to the opinion of a Regular adjutant was due to the fact that he was a Regular soldier and a man who knew. The man, however, who was only what they would call one of themselves would not have that influence, and he did not see how a man of sufficient energy to become a good adjutant would consent to take up a career which offered as little as that of an adjutancy of a Territorial unit. He thought that a Regular adjutant was absolutely essential to the well-being of the Auxiliary Forces.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUsuggested that the Government might meet him in this matter. His second Amendment covered the point he wished to raise, and so with the permission of the House he would drop the first. As regarded the second Amendment, if between now and the Report Stage better grammar could be made of the clause by inserting "shall" in a different place he would be prepared to accept it. But they did want to emphasise their desire that the adjutant should be a man who would keep the Auxiliary Force in touch with the latest practice of the Regular Army. That was the object he had in view, and if the Government could give an assurance on that point he would be perfectly willing to leave the matter to the Report Stage. But unless he had the assurance in definite and precise terms he must press the Amendment.
§ Amendment by leave, withdrawn.
1363
§
Amendment moved—
In page 7, line 6, after the word 'staff' to insert the words 'including adjutants and staff sergeants who shall be members of His Majesty's regular forces.' "—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he was afraid the noble Lord must press his Amendment as the Government could give no assurance such as he asked for.
§ Clause 6, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 7 agreed to.
§ Clause 8: —
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUmoved an Amendment to substitute three years for the four years which the clause provided as the maximum term of enlistment under this part of the Bill. He said he had put down the Amendment with the object of asking the noble Earl what his views were on the question of enlistment. At the present moment the Bill read as follows—
Shall be enlisted to serve for such a period as may be prescribed, not exceeding four years reckoned from the date of his attestation.The practice in most of the Volunteer regiments now was to enlist for three years. He did not raise any serious objection to four years if it would produce the same number of men, but he was rather afraid that four years was too long a period, and that it would make for the success of the new Territorial Army if three instead of four years was inserted. There were many men among the working classes who shifted from place to place, and it seemed that four years was too long a period to tie themselves up for.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 8, line 37, to leave out the word 'four: and insert the word ' three"—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHdid not think there was very much in the proposal of his noble friend. The effect of his Amendment would be to substitute three years for four years as the maximum term for which a man should be enlisted 1364 in the Territorial Force, and he rather gathered that his noble friend supported the Amendment, having reference to the fact that three years was the term for which the Yeomanry and Volunteers were enlisted.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUThe usual period.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid that if it were found by experience that three years was the more convenient period it could be adopted in the Bill as it now stood. Four years was merely a maximum. The military authorities were desirous of having power if they found it desirable to enlist men for four years, and that term was considered by some to be rather more convenient. He hoped under the circumstances the Amendment would not be pressed.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUsaid that after the noble Earl's explanation he was quite willing to withdraw his Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ *THE DUKE OF BEDFORDasked whether the terms of enlistment for the Territorial soldier would enable the Territorial Force to be used in aid of the civil power.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid the Territorial soldier could not be called out in aid of the civil power, but, of course, as an individual he might be called upon in exactly the same way as any ordinary citizen.
§ *THE DUKE OF BEDFORDasked whether the form of foreign service for the Territorial Force would be similar to that for the Militia. Would they be asked, in circumstances where refusal was almost impossible, to volunteer for foreign service?
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHThe members of the Territorial Force may volunteer for foreign service just as the present Militia, and Section 12 of the present Bill is based on the corresponding section of the existing Militia Act.
LORD RAGLANWill it be made quite clear to the men, when they enlist, that they will be asked to volunteer in case of emergency for foreign service?
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHYes; it will be made quite clear that they may, if they wish, volunteer for foreign service.
§ Clause, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 9:—
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDsaid that the deputy-lieutenant, who appeared nowhere else in the Bill, suddenly presented himself in Subsection (2) of this clause and had the duty placed upon him of attesting a recruit. Might he ask if that was the only duty left to the deputy-lieutenants? If that was all they were to be called upon to perform it seemed hardly worth while keeping them in existence, and the Government might consider the position of the class altogether.
§ THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he did not exactly know at the moment what the duties of deputy-lieutenants were, although he was one himself. He only knew that he got a uniform early in life. As regarded the future, it was intended that deputy-lieutenancies should be conferred on those who rendered some service in these associations.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 10: —
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUasked what would happen in the case of a man in the Territorial Army who was insubordinate, say in a drill hall. Would he then come under the military law, arid had the commanding officer or the officer on parade power to punish him?
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHasked the noble Lord if he would communicate with him privately on the point, as he did not like to answer off-hand.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUasked whether the men of the Territorial 1366 Army were to be under military law on every occasion when they were wearing uniform.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he really could not give his noble friend an answer to the question there and then.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUhoped the noble Earl would look up the point and be good enough to inform the House either on the Report stage or Third Reading.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 11 agreed to.
§ Clause 12:—
LORD RAGLANmoved an Amendment providing that the Territorial Force .shall be liable for service in "the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man" as well as in the United Kingdom. He said it seemed to him a very great pity un-necessarily to tie the hands of the War Office and the country in the use they could make of the Territorial Army. After all, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man were comparatively close to these shores, and it would be a great mistake to treat men going to either the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man as going on foreign service. He did not know if the Joint Naval and Military Committee was in existence now, but if it was and the noble Earl presided over it, he would in all probability have heard a good deal about the Channel Islands. He thought perhaps it was not necessary for him to say more than that the defence of the Channel Islands, in the event of certain wars occurring, would have a most delicate and difficult task, and it would be an enormous advantage to the War Office if they had the power of despatching troops from the Territorial Forces to the Channel Islands, without going through the very long paraphernalia of asking the regiment if they would volunteer and so forth. After all, the Channel Islands were not so very far from these shores and were a place to which large numbers of our population were accustomed to go with regard to the Isle of Man, 1367 although not strategically so important a place, still there was a difficulty as to which the noble Earl would perhaps enlighten him, if he did not wish to accept this Amendment. The difficulty was that, although the Bill applied to the Isle of Man, he did not see any power to mobilise any part of the Territorial Force in the Isle of Man. Supposing, therefore, some part of the Territorial Force was raised in the Isle of Man it self, it would be impossible to embody it for service there, although it could be embodied in Great Britain and Ireland. This Amendment would strengthen the hands of the War Office and inflict no harm on the forces.
§
Amendment proposed —
In page 11, line 35, after the word 'Kingdom ' to insert the words ' the Channel Isles and the Isle of -Man.' "—(Lord Raglan.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid the Isle of Man was included under Clause 37 in the definition of the United Kingdom; therefore, whatever applied to the United Kingdom applied also to the Isle of Man. As regarded the Channel Islands, those islands already had their own Militia under their own special laws, allocated for the defence of the islands, and they had, therefore, been expressly excluded from the operation of the Bill.
§ Amendment, by leave withdrawn.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 13 agreed to.
§ Clause 14:—
LORD LOVATmoved to leave out "fifteen" and insert "eighteen" as the maximum number of days of annual training. He said the reason he pressed. this Amendment was because the Yeomanry at the present time went out for sixteen days, and he was certain a very large number of the Yeomanry would not wish to see their training cut down even by a day. At present, especially in those corps in which it was difficult to get the men together for squadron training—the regulation being that certain squadron training had to be done before the regular annual training—it 1368 was customary to bring out the regiments for eighteen days in order to get in the squadron drills. It was a matter of convenience for the officers and men, and made for greater efficiency, and he would ask the Government if they could see their way to allow this Amendment. By Subsection (2) of the clause His Majesty in Council might at any time order the period of annual training to be shorter or longer, and he would press the Amendment because the clause gave the opportunity of making any change. If the Amendment were not carried it would undoubtedly result in the Yeomanry having fifteen days instead of sixteen or eighteen as at the present time, and a considerable loss of efficiency would be occasioned.; While they of the Yeomanry wished to meet the Government's suggestions in every way, there was one point on which every Yeomanry meeting that he had attended had been strong upon, and that was the point of resisting every attack on their efficiency. He felt that to cut down the annual training would be a distinct blow at efficiency.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 12, line 37, to leave out the word 'fifteen,' and insert the word 'eighteen.'" — (Lord Loral.)
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUdesired to raise the question of the future policy with regard to fifteen and eighteen days. The clause provided that the force should be trained for not less than eight or more than fifteen days in a year. Speaking for Volunteer corps he sincerely hoped the Government would be able to give them fifteen days training in the future, with which they would become, he thought, a very efficient and useful force. He thought the noble Earl would agree with him that nearly every inspecting officer in his confidential' reports had recommended for several years past that fifteen days should be the minimum training for the Auxiliary Forces, and he hoped on that point the noble Earl would be able to extract from the Chancellor of the Exchequer a promise to allow, at any rate to the best of the forces, fifteen days training. It was the general wish among all commanding officers he knew that they should have fifteen days' training in future, 1369 and he hoped the money that was necessary might be found.
THE EARL OF LONSDALEhoped the Government would see their way to extend the period of training to eighteen days.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHwas afraid that when the very large incursions into the public exchequer which had been already promised during the progress of the Bill were realised the relations of the War Office with the Treasury would be somewhat strained; but, subject to the Treasury, he was sure they at the War Office would always try to make the best conditions and get as much money as they could. With regard to the particular Amendment moved by Lord Lovat, all he wished to say in regard to the matter was that fifteen days were fixed in the Bill after a good deal of consideration and after consultation with the General Staff, who hoped that, under the new system of training, they would be able to render the troops far more efficient in fifteen days than was possible under the present system. He hoped, therefore, the Amendment would not be pressed.
*LORD HARRISdid not think the noble Earl quite understood the proposition. At present the arrangement was for sixteen days and the men went up for squadron drills on the two days previous. They did not draw full pay for those two days, but only half pay, which was given whether they went to the place of training for these squadron drills or whether they performed them at home. No extra expense was put upon the Government by the arrangement. It was a great convenience to have all the men at one place, because there was a full number for each squadron drill. When the squadron drill was done at home the probability was that they did not put in nearly so many men as at the place of training. It was no expense to the Government, and, after all, it was only permissive, and he could not see that it could do any harm at any rate to consider it carefully.
*THE EARL OF SCARBROUGHsuggested as a possible compromise 1370 that they might insert after "fifteen days," "or, in the case of the mounted branch, eighteen days." This was a point they felt strongly about for three reasons. First, the mounted branch had double as much to learn as the Infantry branch of the Territorial Army, and, therefore, it was necessary that the former should have as much time at the annual training as possible; secondly, it was hoped in future that they might be able to take more part than they had in the past in combined training, and if they had only eight or fourteen days' training it was unlikely that they could take part with any usefulness in combined training. They must have at least a week or eight days preliminary training, and that loft little time afterwards for manæuvres. Then on the point of discipline, it was of immense advantage to have as much training as possible. In his small experience he had discovered that since the length of annual training had been doubled the discipline of the Yeomanry had increased greatly, and that, he thought, was a point of great value.
THE EARL OF LONSDALEsaid the noble Earl had referred to the "now system of training." Would he kindly explain what the new system of training was? He knew nothing about it and had never heard of it.
§ *LORD HAVERSHAMsaid that Section 3 of this clause met the objections of Lord Harris and Lord Scarbrough.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he ought perhaps to have stated that a committee at the War Office with the General Staff were considering the whole question of training. He thought, how ever, he might accept the compromise suggested by Lord Scarbrough in the case of Yeomanry, making the maximum eighteen days instead of fifteen days.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 12, line 37, after the word 'days,' to insert the words' or, in the case of the mounted branch, eighteen days.' "—(Lord Scarbrough.)
§ On the Question that the clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill—
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUasked who the prescribed general officer referred to in the clause would be. Was he the person whom the noble Earl designated in his statement on going into Committee, when he said the prescribed general officer was the officer who was to be prescribed? That did not take them much further. Would he be the general officer commanding the district?
*LORD HARRISasked for an explanation as to why the general officer was given power to do away with the training altogether or reduce it. Was that a matter of convenience because all the provisions as regarded training required an authority superior to that of the general officer? Now he was to be suddenly given the power of doing away with the training altogether. He was sorry to say his experience of general officers was that they were not always very clear as regarded the duties of the Auxiliary Forces. One, he remembered, ordered him to find mobilisation equipment when he had no power to order anything of the kind, and in the course of voluminous correspondence he proved to the general officer that it was not the case. Another ordered him not to manoeuvre over land or fire blank ammunition without the permission of every landowner in the neighbourhood. That was obviously a ridiculous order, and, if carried out, would have made it impossible for any troops, Regular or Auxiliary, to do any manoeuvres in any part of the country. He took the liberty of asking whether this was an order of the Army Council, but his request was never answered until this year, when an officer came down and asked him what arrangements he had made for a night attack. He explained what he had done, but added that, of course, he could not cross any lands or fire any blank ammunition. The officer asked the reason, and he informed him of the general officer's instructions. He (Lord Harris) afterwards heard that the order had not been sufficiently considered, and that the officer who gave it had left the Army. He wanted to know whether there would be any appeal from the prescribed officer to the Army Council under this Bill, 1372 and, if not, whether there might be no training at all if the prescribed officer so took it into his head.
*LORD LUCASthought with regard to the prescribed general officer dispensing with the drill of any unit, that practically it would only be the general officer commanding-in-chief in the district, who was, of course, responsible to the Army Council for the efficiency of the troops of the Territorial Force under him. Therefore it would only be under very exceptional circumstances that he would dispense with the training of a regiment, and, of course, being accountable to the Army Council for its efficiency, he would have to satisfy them that the reasons for dispensing with the training were adequate or he would be held responsible by the Army Council. The answer to Lord Montagu, who asked why in this clause the commanding officer was allowed to absolve a man from training, whereas later on the term used was "the prescribed officer," was, he thought, found in the fact, that as a rule the prescribed officer would be the commanding officer. It was, however, impossible to tie themselves absolutely to the words "commanding officer," because occasions might arise under certain circumstances where it would be more useful for an officer who was not the commanding officer to make himself responsible. For instance, in the case of an outlying company where the commanding officer had not an intimate knowledge of the facts, it might prove useful to let the company commander deal with any case that arose.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUThen I gather the word "prescribed" means prescribed by the Arm.' Council?
§ Clause, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 15:—
§
Amendment moved—
In page 13, line 27, to leave out the word ' thirty' and insert the word " forty."— (Viscount Midleton.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHI accept this.
§ Consequental Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clauses 16 to 20 agreed to.
§ Clause 21:—
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUmoved an Amendment providing that the value of public property wrongfully sold or destroyed by a member of the Territorial Force shall be recoverable by the County Association "at the request of the officer commanding the unit to which the person be longs." He said that perhaps the noble Earl could give their Lordships some information as to the machinery by which money might be recovered from a , man who injured his arms, destroyed his clothing, or behaved in such a way as to make himself liable in some amount to the County Association. He had only put his Amendment down with the object of eliciting information, as it was highly undesirable that any doubt should exist regarding these and other matters of machinery. He took it that the meaning of the clause was that on the representation of the commanding officer of the particular unit the County Association would proceed against a man who had j made himself liable in some way or other; ' that they would sue him in a Court and would recover the amount for which he was liable and that the money, if any was recovered, would be paid into the Ex chequer or the County Association.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 16, line 19, after the word 'association' to insert the words 'at the request of the officer commanding the unit to which the person belongs.' "—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)
§ *The EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he did not think the Amendment was one that his noble friend would wish to press to a division after an explanation had been given of what its effect would be. His noble friend proposed to insert after ''association" the words "at the request 1374 of the officer commanding the unit to which the person belongs." The effect of the Amendment would be that the association would be prevented from suing a man of the Territorial Force who had damaged his arms or accoutrements unless it was requested to do so by the commanding officer. The Government did not think that was a discretion which it was either reasonable or fair to place on the commanding officer. The association was responsible to the Army Council for all property which was bought or secured out of the public funds, and therefore the association was the proper authority to decide when and how steps ought to be taken in the event of wrongful disposal of such property. One of the main objects of the Bill was to relieve the officer commanding from all administrative responsibility of this kind, and he thought his noble friend would probably be satisfied with this explanation.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUsaid that at the present moment in case of default on the part of a man, as, for instance, if he did not make himself efficient, the commanding officer would sue the man in court and recover the amount of the capitation grant. Was he to understand that in future the commanding officer was to have nothing to do with informing the County Association, and that that body was to act entirely on its own initiative? He wanted to know how the machinery would work, as it was important that there should be no doubt with regard to matters of this kind as to the course that would be followed. Supposing a man failed to make himself efficient and did not obtain the grant, would the commanding officer tell the County Association or would he leave the County Association to find out the fact itself? This was a rather important point, because commanding officers might be put in a difficulty. They would want to recover the amount of the capitation grant from a man, and it seemed to him that they would have to do it in future through the County Association.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHI think that this does not come under the clause. The question under discussion relates to suing for the recovery of 1375 property and not in respect of inefficiency.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 22:—
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUmoved an Amendment providing that an officer or man of the Territorial Force should not be compelled to serve as a peace officer or parish officer, and should be exempt from serving on any jury and from serving in the office of High Sheriff." He did not think that the Government would have any very serious objection to this Amendment, at any rate so far as the War Office was concerned, although certainly the Home Office might object to it. He would point out that it was a great hardship on a commanding officer of a battalion, who was necessarily put to some expense, and had to devote a good deal of time to the duties of his position, to lie called upon to serve, perhaps not in the same comity as his command, in the office of high sheriff. He was prepared in order to meet all contingencies to insert in his Amendment the words, "if he should so desire" so that it would be made quite clear that it was optional in a commanding officer whether he served as high sheriff or not. He made that offer because he believed there were people to be found who were so patriotic that they were willing to fill the position of commanding officer and at the same time to act as high sheriff, although he was bound to say that he pitied them. There were, however, a great number of officers who might be called upon to fill the office of high sheriff and who would desire to be free from those onerous duties. They would like in fact to have the same advantage as they did in the matter of exemption from jury service.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 17, line 8, after the word 'jury' to insert the words ' and from serving in the office of high sheriff.' "—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEI am sure everybody must sympathise with the object of the noble Lord. He desires, as I gather, that people who undertake 1376 one form of public service, should be relieved from another. I have no doubt he has also in his mind the possibility that the prospect of escaping the-somewhat onerous duties of high sheriff might be an inducement to gentleman to join the Volunteer Force. I am able to speak on this subject with some experience, because the ultimate selection of the high sheriffs rests partly with the Exchequer and partly with my Department. I do not think it would be quite safe to go outside the present rule in this matter. The present law is that all commissioned officers of the Regular Army on the active list are exempt from serving as high sheriffs, and it seems to be reasonable, now that the Militia practically becomes part of the Regular Army, that Militia officers should have the same privilege. Whether under the law as it stands, the words "officers of the Regular Army on the active list" would include Militia officers, seems to be doubtful, and therefore we should propose to bring up at a later stage of the Bill words that will make it perfectly clear that officers of the Militia are included. Now, as regards the Volunteers, and, of course, the Yeomanry, no specific exemption is granted to the officers. But when they are called out for training as reserves, they are subject to military law, and therefore any officer of the reserve, during his period of training, cannot serve as high sheriff. That is provided for, and therefore all officers of the Territorial Force, during embodiment, muse be discharged from personally performing the duties of high sheriff.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDWhich clause is that under?
§ *THE EARL OF CREWESubsection (3) of this clause. It is provided there that if a high sheriff is an officer of the Territorial Force, then during embodiment, he shall be discharged from personally performing the office of high sheriff. As noble Lords are aware, those who have to serve in the office of high sheriff very often ask to be excused from doing so, and a great variety of excuses are-urged. I think it stands to reason that in the case of any officer in the position explained by the noble Lord, that is, 1377 being in command of a battalion and having heavy duties to perform, his military duties would be taken as an adequate excuse for his not filling the office of high sheriff. It would, I think, probably be a reason for his being put back on the list and not being called upon to serve as high sheriff until his term of military duty had come to an end. I should much have liked to go the whole way with the noble Lord, but as n matter of fact there are some counties in which it is by no means easy to find gentlemen to take this onerous office, and if the mere fact of having a commission in the Yeomanry or the Volunteers was to be taken as a legal or a regular excuse I am afraid the difficulty might be added to, though, looking at the other side of the question, I can quite believe that it might possibly be of benefit in swelling the ranks of Volunteer officers.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUsaid that after what the noble Earl had said he did not think that he could press his Amendment. He hoped, however, that it might be regarded as an under standing that the noble Earl's Department, in conjunction with the Exchequer, would in future consider favourably the case of men commanding battalions in connection with exemptions from the office of high sheriff.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clauses 23 to 27 agreed to.
§ Clause 28:—
§
Amendment moved—
In page 20, line 4, to leave out the word ' Militia.' '—(The Earl of Portsmouth.)
§ "VISCOUNT MIDLETONsaid he did not know whether the noble Earl had noticed that he had amended the Amendment he now proposed. He thought perhaps the noble Earl would now see no objection to it. On the previous night the point turned on the question of the pay, but that was not now included in the Amend- 1378 ment, which merely provided that the-i Order in Council should specify any i changes in the status and conditions of service which it was natural should be stated in Orders in Council.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 20, line 10, after the word 'accordingly' to insert the words 'provided that the said Order in Council shall specify any change in the conditions of service of the Yeomanry or Volunteer force, and that any further change shall be similarly notified by Order in 'Council.' "—(Viscount Midleton.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he was afraid he would have some difficulty in taking the Amendment in the form in which it was moved. Its effect would be to make it necessary not only to specify in an Order in Council all the changes effected by the transfer of the Yeomanry and the Volunteers to the Territorial Force, but all subsequent changes in the conditions of service of that force. As regarded the first part of the Amendment, it would be extremely difficult to specify in an Order in Council all the changes in the conditions of service of the Yeomanry and the Volunteers. As regarded the second part, in the case of future changes, all the regulations to be effected by ordinary Army Orders under Clause 6 concerning the conditions of service of the force would have to be effected by Order in Council. That would be very cumbrous. Clause 6. Sub-section (7), already provided that all orders and regulations made under it should be laid on the Table of both Houses of Parliament, and that provision would appear to be ample as regarded informing Parliament. The proposal to carry out the ordinary regulations under Orders in Council seemed unworkable, and therefore it was not because he differed from his noble friend on any question of principle, but because it was thought that his proposal would be almost impossible to work in practice, that he was unable to accept the Amendment.
§ *VISCOUNT MIDLETONthought that there was no objection to the first part of the Amendment, "Provided that the said Order in Council shall specify any change in the conditions of service of the Yeomanry or Volunteer Force." If he stopped there, and the noble Earl 1379 would accept it, he would ask their Lord ships to allow him to withdraw the last part of the Amendment.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEI confess I do not understand exactly what it is the noble Viscount wishes to have included in the Order in Council. Does he mean that the actual effect of the changes on each battalion and regiment is to be printed in the Gazette in an Order in Council? If he merely means the general terms of the conditions of service I should conceive that that might be done; but there appears to me to be a possibility of some extremely elaborate details being asked for, applicable to particular units and districts. These would be very cumbrous and very expensive to print in the Gazette.
§ *VISCOUNT MIDLETONdid not quite understand why the noble Earl objected. Surely this was a reasonable proposal. A very great change was going to be made in the position of the Volunteers and also of the Yeomanry in their transfer to the Territorial Force. All that was asked by the Amendment was that the actual change in the conditions of service should be explained. For instance, men would be attested instead of being enrolled and they would become liable to serve for four years. His desire was merely that the change in the conditions should be specified in such a manner that they could be readily understood.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHI am informed by experts that it is quite impossible to accept the Amendment as it is proposed. It would be quite un-workable.
§ *VISCOUNT MIDLETONIf the noble Earl thinks my proposal is un workable I will communicate with him before the Report stage.
§ Amendment by leave, withdrawn.
§ *THE DUKE OF BEDFORDmoved an Amendment, the purport of which, he said, was simply that the new county associations should acquire by purchase drill halls and rifle ranges which were now the property of borough or county councils. He hoped that the 1380 Government would see their way to accept it.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 20, line 28, after the word' relates' to insert the words 'Provided that any land with the buildings upon it heretofore acquired by the council of any county or borough for military purposes within the meaning of the Military Lands Acts, shall be transferred to the association of the county, and the amount expended by such council in acquiring such land and buildings shall be repaid to such council by the association.—(The Duke of Bedford.)
§ THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he was afraid he could not accept the Amendment. Under the Military Lands Act the councils of counties and boroughs were empowered to acquire land and erect buildings on behalf of Volunteer corps, and to borrow money for the purpose. In pursuance of the powers so conferred a few county and borough councils had provided drill halls—not many—for their local Volunteer corps. The effect of the Amendment of his noble friend would be that all these drill halls and rifle ranges would be compulsorily transferred from the county or borough councils which provided them to the County Associations, and on the other hand, and as a necessary corollary, the associations would be compelled to repay to the councils the whole of the money they had expended on the property. The drill halls and the rifle ranges might have appreciated or they might have depreciated in value. The county or borough council might be unwilling to part with their property. The associations might be unwilling to take that property over. But if this Amendment were inserted in the Bill no party would be given any choice in the matter. The transfer would have to take place. and it did not seem to the Government to be either possible or reasonable to go further than they had done in paragraph (e) of the clause. Their Lordships would see that by that paragraph the transfer of such drill halls and rifle ranges might be effected by Order in Council if both the council and the association assented. That was to say, they would make their own arrangements and their own bargain. He was afraid that, for the reasons he 1381 had stated, the Government could not accept the Amendment, and he hoped that his noble friend would not feel compelled to press it.
*THE EARL OF MOUNT-EDGCUMBEasked the noble Earl, if he was not able to express any special opinion about it now, to consider the position of rifle ranges which were not the property of county or borough councils, but of county volunteer or rifle associations. Considerable sums had been spent on rifle ranges which would be necessary for the use of County Associations here after, and the question was, would they be taken over by the new County Associations or would they remain in possession of the county volunteer or rifle associations? He might ask in fact, would the county volunteer associations continue to exist at all? If they did not, how would the property which they had acquired for the purpose of rifle shooting be dealt with?
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHMay I suggest to my noble friend that he should do as he has done on former occasions—that is, write to me on the matter, and I shall be pleased to reply to the best of my ability.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUasked the noble Earl to consider the whole question of the transfer of drill halls 10 County Associations, as it was a very complicated and difficult matter. Some of the drill halls were in the hands of trustees and some were in the hands of commanding officers representing the donors. He understood that the Lord Chancellor was going to look into the whole question of transfer, and perhaps the noble Earl would inform their Lordships on the Report Stage more fully as to the, definition, of this clause.
LORD RAGLANsaid that perhaps the noble Earl would also give them information when the time came as to how a body which had no assets was to take over a liability.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause agreed to.
1382§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYmoved to insert at the beginning of Part III, the following new clause, "(1) From and after the passing of this Act, the Militia shall become part of the Army Reserve, but shall continue in all respects to be subject to the Militia Act, 1882, except as hereinafter provided. (2) Section 12 of the Militia Act, 1882, shall not apply to any militiaman enlisted or re-engaged after the passing of this Act, and in lieu thereof the following provision shall apply: Any part of the Militia shall be liable to serve-in any part of the United Kingdom, and when embodied to serve elsewhere. (3) Any militiaman serving at the date of the passing of this Act may make a voluntary offer, certified by his commanding officer,, to serve under the same conditions as a militiaman enlisted after the passing of this Act, and thereupon for the remainder of the term of his service the provisions of this section shall apply to him in the same manner as they apply to a militiaman enlisted after the passing of this Act." He said that they now came-back to the question of the Militia, and he had to say quite frankly that he for one was very grateful to the Government for the statement made by the noble Earl, the Under-Secretary for War, at the beginning of the Committee Stage. The only thing he would like to add on that point was that he thought it would be for the convenience of their Lordships, and in order that it should be on record that the Under-secretary had given that assurance, that a memorandum should be presented to Parliament covering the ground which the noble Earl covered in his very lucid statement. If that could be done he was sure it would be a very satisfactory way of placing on record, in a permanent form, the assurance given by the noble Earl. Having made that preface, he would be expected to explain why it was he was not yet satisfied, and was moving this Amendment. His defence for so doing was that he really believed the Amendment carried out the wishes of His Majesty's Government. He had two grounds for that view: First of all, the intrinsic merits of the Amendment, which he should describe to their Lordships later, and secondly, the fact that in all probability this was the original intention of the Secretary of 1383 State. The right hon. Gentleman in another place confessed in the most naive manner that he himself had, at a previous period, a strong temptation in the direction taken by the concession which he then made to the Opposition. He was only asking the right hon. Gentleman, therefore, to revert entirely and heartily, if he might say so, to his old love. The right hon. Gentleman was no doubt misled for a short time by the novel charms of the special reserve, but as a matter of fact the original darling of his heart was undeniably the sober and demure Militia to which he had now reverted. Under these circumstances he (the Marquess of Salisbury) felt that he was not committing any act hostile to the Government when he suggested to them that they would do well, not only to use the Militia, but to use also the machinery by which the Militia had been governed in the past, subject, of course, to certain definite exceptions, one of which was that they should serve abroad in time of need. He had said that the acceptance of the Amendment was advisable because it carried out the original intention of the Secretary of State, but it was also advisable on its merits. As the Bill stood before their Lordships there were a great many omissions. The Government intended to use the Militia, as a special reserve. They intended to use its traditions; to take over what he might call the goodwill of the business as a going concern. One essential thing in that goodwill was the name of the Militia. Undoubtedly the Government would use the name of the Militia if they could, but how were they going to transfer the name of the Militia from the force as it was now known to the special reserve unless they used the Militia Act. He would run very rapidly through one or two other points. There was the period of service. For the first time, as he believed, in the history of the military forces of the Crown there was no period of service prescribed in the Bill for the men of the special reserve. The men of the Army were very particularly limited. Their engagement was for twelve years. The period of service in the case of men of the Militia was rigidly denned. It was six years. But in the case of the special reserve no limit whatever was put in the Act of Parlia- 1384 ment. It might be six years, or twelve years, or for life so far as the Bill was concerned. Then the special reserve was not territorialised. It was quite true that under the clause the Army Council were given power to form these special reservists into battalions and corps, but when a man was enlisted he could not be. enlisted as a special reservist into any special corps. That was entirely different from the practice in the Army and the existing practice in the Militia. He believed also that it was contrary to the intention of the Government them- selves, because they followed territorial feeling. Their Lordships had often been told that it was intended to maintain in its integrity the territorial character of the Army, and that it was hoped this new reserve would be territorial, just as much as the Army, the Militia, and the Volunteers were territorial. But it was not provided for in the Bill. There was no provision that a man could be enlisted into any particular corps. Then there was no appropriate attestation. The Government recognised that the attestation used [for the soldiers would not do, and they had announced that they were going to have another, but they had not yet told Parliament what its form was to be. In the Militia Act there was a form of attestation prescribed. Then there was not a sufficient provision in the Bill for re-engagement. He was aware that the noble Earl had an Amendment on the Paper to cover that point, but it was not until his attention was drawn to the omission that the Government awoke to the fact that they had left out a provision as to how men were to be re-engaged. There was on the face of the Bill as it stood no provision for the disembodiment of the special reserve. Undoubtedly the Government were going to try to meet that by another Amendment, but he did not think it was a very adequate one. It did not cover all the ground, but it certainly illustrated the point he was speaking upon, namely, that in the form in which the Bill was laid before the House none of these points were dealt with. It was especially striking that the Government had made no provision in their Bill for passing men from the special reserve into the Army itself. That was ones of the essential parts of the plan. Just as the Militia 1385 now furnished 12,000 men a year to the Line so the special reserve must go on furnishing 12,000 or 13,000 men a year to the Line. The Militia Act provided for every one of the things which he had specified to their Lordships. As regards the last point he had mentioned, which was a matter of very great importance, no doubt it could be got round. He did not deny that. What would happen if a man wished to transfer was that he would be first discharged from the special reserve and then re-enlisted in the Line. That was. however, a very awkward and clumsy arrangement. He saw no reason why a man who wished to get out of the special reserve without buying his discharge should not go to the officers and say that he wished to enlist in the Army. "Very well,'' they would say, "then you must first, be discharged from the special reserve." The man would be discharged, and than he might say, "I will not take the oath and be attested for the Army." The result would be that the man would secure his discharge without having to buy it and the country would lose his services. He did not desire, however, to lay too great stress on any of those points which he had no doubt could all be got over by Amendments. It seemed a great pity, however, that where the Government had the choice of two Acts of Parliament, one which provided for all these things— the Militia Act and one which provided for none of them—-the Reserve Forces Act—they should have gone out of their way to choose the least convenient of the two Acts. It was not surprising that the Reserve Forces Act was not adequate. It was not intended at all for the purposes for which the Government were using it. It was passed in order to provide a reserve of men whose training was a matter of the past, whose territorial connection was already clear—men who had served their time in the Line, and were going to be passed into the reserve. None of the provisions which he had described were necessary to them; but when the Government were enlisting a man for the first time then all these things became of importance. It was important that there should be a right form of attestation, it was important that the num. her of years a man was to serve should be specified, and it was important that 1386 the particular battalion to which he was to be attached should be communicated to him when he took the oath. The Government had, as it were, used for the purpose of a prologue a piece of literature which was really designed for an epilogue. Therefore it was found when they applied this Act of Parliament for their purpose that it was not suitable and not apt. He invited the Government in their own interests to go to the logical conclusion of the change which they made when they resumed their attachment to the Militia, an attachment which, as he had said, wandered away; he invited them to go to that logical conclusion by using the Act of Parliament which was suitable for the Militia. He believed if they did that they would find the drafting of their Bill much more complete, and at the same time they would gratify the Militia. Why did he say that? Because if the Government did what he suggested it would be a public advertisement which could be mistaken by no one that the Government did not intend by this change to disturb the Militia, or its constitution, or its tradition, or its function in any way whatsoever, except in the particulars which were essential to their serving abroad in time of trouble. That seemed to him to be a complete case. If the Government were good enough to consider his Amendment he would not of course adhere strictly to the precise words in which it was drafted. He did, however, press on the Government that the case he had made was really very complete.
§
Amendment moved—
To insert as a new clause: '(1) From and after the passing of this Act the Militia shall become part of the Army Reserve, but shall continue in all respects to be subject to the Militia Act, 1882, except as hereinafter provided. (2) Section 12 of the Militia Act, 1882, shall not apply to any Militiaman enlisted or re-engaged after the passing of this Act, and in lieu thereof the following provision shall apply: Any part of the Militia shall be liable to serve in any part of the United Kingdom, and when embodied to serve elsewhere. (3) Any Militiaman serving at the date of the passing of this Act may make a voluntary offer, certified by his commanding officer, to serve under the same conditions as a Militia man enlisted after the passing of this Act, and thereupon for the remainder of the term of his service the provisions of the section shall apply to him in the same manner as they
1387
apply to a Militiaman enlisted after the passing of this Act.' "—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHthought that the noble Marquess had somewhat indulged, if he might say so, in the language of imagination in honouring Acts of Parliament with the name of literature. The real difficulty in which they had been placed on that side of the House was that they had, he hoped generally to the advantage of the different forces and of good feeling, met the views and wishes of the Militia. When the Bill was originally drafted, the place of the Militia in the Government's scheme was really a very different one from that which it now occupied. He did not want to quarrel with the noble Marquess over questions of form; but after all, this resolved itself very much into a question of drafting. He hoped very much that there were now no questions of principle in conflict between them; but he wanted to explain why the Government could not accept the proposal of the noble Marquess in the form in which he had brought it forward. At the same time he wished to give this undertaking, that they would, between then and Report, where they had not already got Amendments—he was going to propose one or two if they could be taken in Committee—prepare Amendments which, I moved on Report, would give effect to the arrangement at which they had arrived. The Amendment of the noble Marquess was, however, open to a great many serious drafting objections. It proposed that the Militia should become part of the Regular Forces. That he knew, was not the intention of the noble Marquess.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI was impressed with that difficulty, and therefore I changed the drafting of my Amendment last night. If the noble Earl looks at it he will see that it is the Army Reserve now and not the Regular Forces. The Amendment says that: "from and after the passing of this Act, the Militia shall become part of the Army Reserve."
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTH,continuing, said that the alteration having 1388 been made, that particular difficulty had been overcome. Turning to another point, the Militia might still theoretically be raised, not only by enlistment, but also by ballot. The Amendment of the noble Marquess would therefore make balloted men part of the Regular Forces and—under the definition of Regular Forces above quoted—liable to render continual military service in any part of the world. The Militia Act of 1882, which would continue to apply to the Militia, would prevent them being used as drafts for the Regulars, as Clause 4, Sub-section (4), of the Act of 1882 provided that where the corps of a militia man included any battalion or any body of the Regular Forces orders or regulations made under the Act were not to authorise him to be posted without his assent to that battalion or body. The Amendment would prevent a militiaman being employed abroad, except when embodied; and it might be very necessary to have militiamen in Section A of the reserve, which was liable to be called out for service without any Proclamation. But apart from these objections, which the noble Marquess might consider were drafting objections, although they were very serious ones, the proposal of the noble Marquess was open to considerable objections of substance. It would keep the Militia alive as a separate force with distinct terms of service and distinct regulations. It would preserve the whole of the existing 124 battalions of Militia, whereas there was only room in the reserve for 101 battalions, and the effect of Sub-section (3) of the clause would be that for six years, the present term for which militiamen were enlisted, the Militia battalions would include, on the one hand, men who-were not liable for foreign service, and, on the other, men who were so liable. The former class of men could not be used for drafting purposes, and therefore for six years after the Militia battalions became third and fourth battalions they would be encumbered with a number of men who were useless for the purposes which the third and fourth. battalions were intended to subserve. For these reasons the Government found it quite impossible to accept the Amendment of the noble Marquess, and he hoped in saying 1389 that it would be understood that their non-acceptance of it was on' a matter of form, although, a serious one. He did not wish for a moment that the noble Marquess or anyone else inside or outside that House, should imagine that he wished to go back by one word on the statement he had previously made to the House. He believed that he gave an undertaking to the noble Marquess that he would have the statement he made to their Lordships prepared and drawn up as a memorandum which could be laid on the Table of the House. Not only was it the intention of the Government to put the matter straight as regarded what they could do by legislation, but, as he had said be force, they wanted to act up to the letter as well as the spirit of their declaration. It was well-known, of course, that if they were driven to accept certain things in the letter they could, if they did not wish to keep them in good faith, always destroy them in the spirit. That was not, however, either their wish or their intention, and lie hoped, under the circumstances, that the noble Marquess would not press his Amendment.
*LORD HARRIShoped that the noble Earl would give the House some explanation as to how he anticipated the men. of the fourteen squadrons were to be secured. Who was going to enlist them? Were they going to be obtained from the Yeomanry regiments or not?
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY,said that personally he did not desire to press his Amendment on the Government. He was afraid, however, that he could not accept the answers of the noble Earl as to the ballot. Everyone knew it to be unworkable in its present form. It was, if he might say so, only a bugbear. He did not wish, however, to detain their Lordships at that late hour. Therefore, he asked leave to with draw the Amendment, but he hoped he would be allowed to return to the subject after seeing the Amendment which the noble Earl had said he intended to move either on this or the report stage.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
1390§ Clause 29:—
*LORD HARRISasked what inducement was to be given to the Yeomanry regiments to get men to enlist as special reservists. It seemed to him that these men would have very little connection with the regiment when once they had gone into the special reserve. Were they to continue to wear the uniform of the regiment? As far as he could make out, a troop leader who had got one or two of the men of the special reserve in his troop would never see them, and he would hardly know that they belonged to the regiment, because their connection with the regiment would practically have ceased. Then again, if they were not recruited from the regiment who was going to recruit them? Were the ordinary recruiting agencies of the Army to be at liberty to recruit these men without reference to the colonel of the regiment and attach them to the regiment without his consent? There was no explanation about these matters in the Bill, and, in the first place, he hoped that the noble Earl would tell them how the men were to be secured. Secondly, he wanted to know who was going to train these men when once they were attached to the Army Reserve. From what he had heard he believed they were going to be trained with the training battalions or regiments. Apparently the same mistake was going to be made with the special reservists that was made with the second contingent of Imperial Yeomanry during the South African War. The first contingent were trained by the colonel and the corps with excellent results. The second contingent were deliberately taken away from the colonel and the corps and sent down to Aldershot in the most inclement weather with no one to look after them. They were afterwards despatched to South Africa untrained and handed over to the columns still untrained, with the result, that they were abused by every body, although as a matter of fact they never had half a chance. There was some risk of the special reservist experiencing the same difficulties, because no one would care the proverbial two pennyworth what became of him. He would have, so far as he could see, no home, unless a home was going to be found for him somewhere in connection 1391 with the training regiments of which he had spoken. Was the service troop found by the regiment to be a part of the regiment, or was it to be in excess of the establishment of the regiment? If it was to be a part of the establishment of the regiment then obviously the regiment would always be, one troop short, because these men would not come out, he expected, for the annual training of the regiment. They were to be trained, he supposed, in the training regiment and not with their own regiment. If they were to be in excess of the establishment of the regiment it was quite another matter, and in that case there would be no cause of complaint. It was obvious, however, that there was a good deal of uncertainty as to how these men were to be secured, what was to happen to them when they had been obtained, and to what unit of the service they were to belong. He hoped, if not that night, at any rate on the Report Stage, the noble Earl would be able to give a clear explanation about these matters and thus remove the present feeling of uncertainty.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he had taken down a good 'many of the points which his noble friend had put to him, but he did not really know that he need at once go into all the details of the various matters on which he had touched. He (the Earl of Portsmouth) had mentioned already, but he thought his noble friend was not present at the time, that a Committee had been appointed under the presidency of Lord Scarbrough, and it was expected to go into all these details. He might tell his noble friend, however, that these men would be recruited from the regiments. The Government attached the greatest possible importance to securing that interchange—the men being recruited from the regiment and going back to the regiment. He had an Amendment to Clause 29 which he would now move.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 21, line 31, after the word 'reservists' to insert the words 'and a special reservist may be re-engaged, and when re-engaged shall continue subject to the terms of service applicable to special reservist?.' "—(The Earl of Portsmouth.)
§
Amendments moved—
In page 22, line 7, after the word ' enlisted' to insert the words 'or re-engaged.'
In page 22, line 10, after the word ' period' to insert as a new subsection'(5) When a proclamation ordering the Army Reserve to be called out on permanent service has been issued, it shall be lawful for His Majesty at any time thereafter by proclamation to order that all special reservists shall cease to be so called out, and thereupon the Secretary of State shall give such directions as may seem necessary or proper for carrying the said proclamation into effect.' " (The Earl of Portsmouth.)
§ Clause 29, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clauses 30 agreed to.
§ Clause 31:—
LORD RAGLANsaid he did not see it laid down anywhere what inducement was to be offered to a special reservist to join the special section. Could the noble Earl inform the House what it was proposed to offer these men?
LORD LUCASunderstood that the amount of the bounty had already been stated to be £4. It was not usually however, included under the Act, but it would be laid down in regulations.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid he had hoped that the Government would have reconsidered the point about the £4. Surely the Government realised that to offer the special reservists 10s. less bounty than lie got as a Militiaman would be almost certain to result in the militiaman not transferring his services. How could the Militia be expected to transfer their services if they got 10s. less in consequence of doing so? He knew that they were to get a certain sum down because the noble Earl told the House so on the previous night, but for every other year except the first year they would have 10s. less. He thought that that was a most dangerous change to make if the Government expected the existing militiamen to transfer their services. The Government had announced that a militiaman who did not transfer his services would not only receive £4 10s., but would not be called out for training at all. 1393 It seemed rather strange that a man should not only be let off from his obligation for service, but still get his £4 10s.
LORD LUCASsaid that a question had been asked as to whether a militiaman would get the non-training bounty if he did not transfer and was not called out. That had been replied to in the affirmative. He believed it was stated that the reason why the bounty was fixed at £4 was because the pay of annual training for which, after all, the Militia was being paid was considerably shorter under the new terms of service than it was under the present conditions. That he believed was the reason which led the Government to fix the bounty at £4.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYDo I understand the noble Lord to say that the militiaman will get the £4 10s. if he does not transfer?
LORD LUCASsaid he had pointed out to the noble Marquess that the statement made on that subject was to the effect that the militiaman who did not transfer would until the end of his period of service receive the non-training bounty. He did not know whether it was the intention of the Government to give him the £4 10s., the non-training bounty being, he believed £3.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid the question was what would the financial position be of a militiaman who did not transfer. Would he get the £4 10s. a year which was the full amount of the bounty he got at the present time, or would he get £3? If he was going to be left with his full £4 10s. there was a great deal to be said for it, because it was a matter more or less of contract with him when he was originally enlisted. It was rather difficult to say at this time of day that because the Government had changed their policy he was to be deprived of 30s. of his bounty which was part of the consideration far which he undertook to serve for six years. He thought that the Government ought to give at least as much to the militiaman if he was asked to transfer as he received at present.
LORD RAGLANsaid that the noble Lord (Lord Portsmouth) had not yet answered the question which he put to him about the special reservists. Under Clause 31 what inducements were going to be offered to them? Militia commanding officers would be put in a most difficult position. They had the vaguest idea of what duties these men were to be asked to perform, and they had no indication whatever as to what they were going to get for undertaking that liability.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHwas afraid he could not answer the question of the noble Lord at the moment, for the j very good reason that the matter had not been considered by the Government,
LORD LUCASsaid that in order to prevent anything he had said in his previous remarks being perhaps misunderstood, he might point out that existing militiamen who transferred to the special contingent would go on getting the same bounty as they were receiving at the present time; so that an existing militiaman who became a member of the special contingent would continue to draw his £4 10s. bounty.
§ Clauses 30 and 31 agreed to.
§ Clause 32:—
LORD RAGLANasked how this Bill was going to affect that arm of the service to which he belonged— namely, the Militia Engineers? They had heard something about Infantry, and something about Artillery, but nothing had been said, nor could he see anything in the Bill, as to what was to happen to the Engineers—under what conditions their recruits were to be trained, and so forth. It was absolutely impossible to train an engineer by giving him fifteen days training a year. Anybody with the most elementary acquaintance with military engineering must know that there was an immense quantity of instruction to be imparted to Engineers. At the present time his own regiment. trained part for seven weeks and part for eight weeks in the year, and he could assure His Majesty's Government that they had not an hour too much for what they had to teach the men. He 1395 therefore asked the noble Earl if now, or at a later stage of the Bill, he would be in a position to give him any indication as to what was to be the future position of the Militia Engineers. There were only two corps—quite little ones—and therefore it was not a very big question. At the same time it affected 1,600 men who constituted, he might venture to say, not the worst corps in the Militia, and he considered it very important to know what was going to happen with regard to them.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHappreciated the interest expressed by the noble Lord in the matter, which he had only had before him for a day or two, and in regard to which, therefore, he could not give detailed information at the moment. As soon, however, as he was in a position to give the House any accurate information on the subject, he would do so. He proposed now, with the permission of the House, to insert a new clause of which he had given notice to the noble Marquess —a new clause to be inserted after Clause 32. He proposed to hand in that clause.
§ After Clause 32:—
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid that the new clause which he had placed in the hands of the noble Marquess some time ago and now moved was an endeavour to give effect to some of the promises he had made with respect to the Militia.
§
Amendment moved—
After Clause 32, to insert the following new clause—'(1) His Majesty may by Order in Council transfer to the Army Reserve such battalions of the Militia as may be specified in the Order, and every battalion so transferred shall. from the date mentioned in the Order, be deemed to have been lawfully formed under this part of this Act as a battalion of special reservists. (2) As from the said date every officer of any battalion so transferred shall be deemed to be an officer in the reserve of officers and every man in such battalion shall be deemed to be a special reservist, and the Order may contain such provisions as may seem necessary for applying the provisions of the Reserve Forces Act, 1882, as amended by this Act, to those officers and men; provided that if any officer or man in any battalion so transferred at the time of such transfer indicates his objection,
1396
nothing in this Order shall affect his existing condition of service.' "—(Earl of Portsmouth.)
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid that The Times report of the clause as read out to the House by the noble Earl yesterday was quite accurate. With regard to the form of the words, he had no objection whatever personally to those words, but he would like to have a little explanation of the sentence—
And the Order may contain such provisions as may seem necessary for applying the provisions of the Reserve Forces Act. 1882, as amended by this Act, to those officers and men.That appeared to give the Government a very wide power. He had no doubt they desired to possess a very wide power. Under those words it might be possible to put right some of the omissions to which he had called attention in the few remarks he had made just previously, and if that were possible, he would be all the more glad to assent to the clause.
§ Clause 33 agreed to.
§ After Clause 33:—
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHmoved to insert a new clause providing that the acceptance of a commission in the reserve of officers should not vacate a seat in Parliament. That was a point which had been overlooked in the House of Commons, and it seemed necessary to the Government to insert this new clause, which he hoped the House would accept.
§
Amendment moved—
After Clause 33, to insert the following new clause:—' The acceptance of a commission as an officer in the reserve of officers shall not vacate the seat of any Members returned to serve in Parliament.' "—(The Earl of Ports-mouth.)
§ Viscount MIDLETONsuggested that the word "Member" be substituted for the word "Members."
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he had no objection if the word "Member" was thought better.
§ Clause 34:—
§ Viscount MIDLETON(who had upon the Paper an Amendment providing for the laying of Orders in Council under the Act before each House of Parliament within a. certain period) asked whether the noble Earl was prepared to accept his Amendment.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEWe do not accept the noble Viscount's Amendment.
§ Viscount MIDLETONsaid that under those circumstances he was afraid he must trouble their Lordships for a few moments, because it was a most important matter. At present the position they stood in with regard to the Bill was that all schemes which were put forward in the first clause of the Bill were laid before both Houses of Parliament, and either House could raise any objection to them. There was no necessity for the Government in any way to come to Parliament for fresh powers for schemes laid before Parliament. Turning to Clauses 13 and 14 of the Bill they would find that all matters subject to Orders in Council under those clauses were also laid before Parliament, and if no objection was taken, they had the force of law; but it was in the power of either House of Parliament within forty days to present an address in addition. Then there came a large number of matters which were the subject of Orders in Council in Clause 28, and those Orders in Council were simply ordered to be laid before Parliament, and no power was given for Parliament to take any action whatever with regard to them. What were those matters? They involved provisions in the case of officers who remained subject to the provisions of the Act as to conditions and area of service; they involved the question of transferring to the association any property belonging to a unit; they involved the question of the transfer to the association of any liabilities of any unit which the association was willing to assume, and of providing for the discharge of any such liabilities not so transferred; they involved the question of the transfer to the association of any land or interest 1398 acquired by the council of a county or borough; and they involved the question of the continuance of the right of re-commending for first appointment. All those wore important subjects. It had been almost a universal practice in such cases of transfers in other Acts of Parliament that there were provisions for Orders in Council being laid before Parliament and power of objection by Parliament being given. Perhaps the most apposite case was the Endowed Schools Act of 1873, in which every scheme had to be laid before Parliament for two months. Again, in the Judicature Act of 1875 the Order in Council relating to Rules of Court were laid before Parliament for forty days, and could be objected to. Again, in the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act of 1881, the Rules were to be laid before Parliament for 100 days, and power in addition was given to Parliament in every kind of case, not merely on. such important matters as the transfer of property, but even with regard to the forms to be used, the scale of; costs, and even the attendance of officers at their offices, the service of notices, and so on. All those were under the. Act of 1881 laid before Parliament, and power of objection was given to either House. And there were other Acts which gave similar powers. He thought it would be a little regrettable if His Majesty's Government, having recognised that in all the matters connected with the administration of this Act, and which were the subject of Orders in Council, the regulations should be subject to there view of Parliament in any exceptional cases in which Parliament might desire to review them, they should select a matter of such great importance as this for exemption from such opportunity of review. He did not wish at that hour to trouble their Lordships with any lengthy remarks, but he thought the noble Lord would find some difficulty in establishing a difference between the earlier portions of the Act and this later portion which was to be withdrawn from the cognisance of Parliament. It was true that—he presumed as a matter of courtesy—these questions were to be laid before Parliament, but after they had been so laid, Parliament was not to be allowed to pronounce 1399 against them. He therefore hoped that the Government would accept his Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
At the beginning of the clause to insert the words 'Every Order in Council required by this Act to be laid before each House of Parliament shall be so laid within forty days next after it is made, if Parliament is then sitting, or if not. within forty days after the commencement of the then next ensuing session; and, if an address is presented to His Majesty by either House of Parliament within the next subsequent forty days on which the said House shall have sat. praying that any such Rule or Order may be annulled, His Majesty may thereupon by Order in Council annul the same, and the Order so annulled shall thenceforth become void and of no effect, but without prejudice to the validity of any proceedings which may in the meantime have been taken under the same.' "—(Viscount Midleton.)
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEI will explain as briefly as I can how it comes about that the Government are not in a position to accept this Amendment. The House will remark that the noble Viscount has pointed out that by an Amendment which was accepted yesterday schemes were to be subject to the revision, in a sense, of this House, and it was an original provision of the Bill that the important possible alterations to be made by Order in Council with reference to military training should lie in draft in the usual manner before they were confirmed as Orders in Council. The natural course for the noble Viscount would have been to have moved for a similar provision at the end of Part II. applying to the transitory provisions, which are the only ones in the Act to which this provision of Clause 34 applies. I take it he did not do that for a very obvious reason—namely, that being transitory provisions—that is to say, being concerned with transfers of different kinds which are to take place under this Act—it is the natural desire that their operation should be as continuous as possible. If the noble Lord had moved that these Orders should lie on the table of the House for forty days, it is perfectly obvious that the whole of the transitory operations might have been brought to a standstill. That, I have no doubt, is a very excellent reason why he did not move his Amendment in that place. Instead of that, he has moved his Amendment in a form which has never, 1400 so far as I know, been included in any Act of Parliament. On that, I challenge contradiction. Attempts have often been made to introduce those particular provisions into minor Acts of Parliament, but I never remember their being seriously introduced by so responsible a Member of either House as the noble Viscount. One case came before us this year in which in a Bill of some importance which never proceeded very far, a similar provision was sought to be inserted; and we objected to it on the grounds upon which every attempt of the kind has always been objected to. What the noble Viscount suggests is this: that His Majesty in Council should approve an Order in Council, and then, after that Order has been approved, it is to come back to the House, and your Lordships are to run the risk of the possibility of placing the Sovereign in Council and one House of Parliament in direct conflict. It appears to me that such a position is one which surely this House would be exceedingly unwilling to occupy; and I should have thought it was scarcely respectful to the Crown to suggest the possibility of such a thing occurring. I am bound to protest against the form of the noble Lord's Amendment; and I trust that, after the explanation I have given, he will not press it. The usual course of laying Orders in Council in draft on the Table is one which I have shown to be practically inapplicable to this particular part of the Bill; and the attempt to get over the difficulty in the manner which the noble Viscount has suggested is one to which we cannot possibly agree. It might save time, in view of the noble Duke's (the Duke of Northumberland) Amendment, if I were to explain that this clause is really common form; it is of a kind which frequently occurs in Acts of Parliament. The Interpretation Act provides that where people are empowered to issue rules and regulations, it is implicitly understood that they can go on issuing fresh rules and regulations. But that does not apply to schemes or Orders in Council; and therefore it is customary that where Orders in Council have to be, as is obviously the case here, renewed or revised, or anything else of that kind, a provision to that effect should be placed in the Bill.
§ Viscount MIDLETONsaid that he was not quite convinced by the noble Earl's argument. With regard to the transitory nature of these provisions, there was nothing whatever to prevent the same action being taken as was taken in all other cases. The Government could proceed; and if Parliament should subsequently interfere no prejudice was created as regarded any act which they had already committed, but further power of action was then withdrawn. As regarded the form which the noble Earl had criticised, he must point out that it was merely the same form as in Clause 15 had already been applied to other parts of the Bill.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEI beg the noble Lord's pardon. Under Clause 15 the Order is to be laid in draft before Parliament, not after it has been approved by the Council.
§ Viscount MIDLETONadmitted that that was so in the case of Clause 15; but that would not be so in the case of the scheme under Clause 1, nor was it so in the other eases he had cited in other Acts of Parliament.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWESchemes are not approved by His Majesty in Council.
§ *Viscount MIDLETONsaid that was the case in the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act in a variety of most important matters. He could cite to their Lordships twelve different cases under the schedule of that Act in which that was the case; and it was also the case in the Endowed Schools Act as well as in the Judicature Act. The latter case was not one of a draft, but of an
§ Order in Council already made; and he thought that, as the Amendment which he had moved was not his own drafting in any way, but legal drafting, the noble Lord would find that its form was absolutely correct. He should very deeply regret if their Lordships parted altogether with their powers with regard to these very important questions, as to which, with all respect, he would say that His Majesty's Government had left a certain amount of vagueness still existing, and as to which he thought, it desirable Parliament should not part altogether with its power of criticising.
THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREsaid the Lord President had argued that the provisions to which the Amendment would apply were provisions of a transitory nature; but they were not all of such a nature. The Amendment, as he understood it, would cover the provisions in Clause 27, Subsection (3), which stated that His Majesty in Council might apply certain enactments, to the Territorial Army. That was an extremely important question for Parliament to part with the criticism of, and it was one in connection with which the Government evidently now asked for a tree hand. He thought that consideration considerably minimised the force of the noble Lord's argument; and that it was extremely important that Parliament should retain some method of control over these transfers.
§ On Question whether the proposed words should be there inserted,
§ Their Lordships divided: Contents 54; Not-Contents, 21.
1403| CONTENTS. | ||
| Bedford, D. | Lindsey, E. | Hill, V. |
| Richmond and Gordon, D. | Lonsdale, E. | Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore.) |
| Morton, E. | ||
| Bath, M. | Mount-Edgcumbe, E. | |
| Camden, M. | Onslow, E. | Abinger, L. |
| Hertford, M. | Roberts, E. | Addington, L. |
| Lansdowne, M. | Romney, E. | Ampthill, L. |
| Salisbury, .VI. | Scarbrough, E. | Basing, L. |
| Waldegrave, E. [Teller.] | Belper, L. | |
| Camperdown, E. | Westmeath, E. | Brodrick, L. (V. Midleton.) |
| Cathcart, E. | Clifford of Chudleigh, L. | |
| Cawdor, E. | Falmouth, V. | Clinton, L. |
| Cranbrook, E. | Goschen, V. | Clonbrock, L. |
| Dartrey, E. | Hampden, V. | Colchester, L. |
| Devon, E. | Hardinge, V. | Digby, L. |
| Dunboyne, L. | Hindlip, L, | Newton, L |
| Ellenborough, L. | Kensington, L. | Raglan, L. |
| Fingall, L. (E. Fingall.) | Lawrence, L. [Teller.] | Tyrone, L. (M. Waterford.) |
| Forester, L. | Methuen, L. | Zouche of Haryngworth, L. |
| Harris, L. | Montagu of Beaulieu, L. | |
| NOT-CONTENTS | ||
| Crewe, E. (L. President.) | Allendale, L. | Granard, L. (E. Granard.) |
| Beauchamp, E. | Brassey, L. | [Teller.] |
| Carrington, E. | Colebrooke, L. | Hamilton of Dalzell, L. |
| Craven, E. | Denman. L. [Teller.] | Haversham, L. |
| Dundonald, E. | Elgin, E. (E. Elgin and Kincardine.) | Kinnaird, L. |
| Portsmouth, E. | Lucas, L. | |
| Fitzmaurice, L. | Ribblesdale, L. | |
| Esher, V. | Glantawe, L. | Sudley, L. (E. Arran.) |
Preamble of the Bill agreed to.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND,who had a Motion upon the Paper to leave out Clause 34, said that, as he gathered from what had fallen from the noble Earl that the Government were not prepared to accept his Amendment in the form in which he had orginally put it upon the Paper, he would, with the leave of the House, move, it in another form; because he quite recognised that it was impossible, after what had been said, to leave out the whole clause. He would therefore move that they leave out the word "Orders" in the first line of the clause, which would, he thought, enable him to raise the point that he wished to raise. He could not help thinking that the noble Earl had rather misunderstood the object which he (the Duke of Northumberland) had in view in moving this Amendment. He did not wish to touch the question of the Orders in Council, which it had just been decided to leave alone. The schemes had already been dealt with by the House, and it had been decided that they must be laid before Parliament. Now it was proposed to leave in the Orders of the Army Council, and the regulations which the Army Council might make under this Act, and they would then have the force of an Act of Parliament. Surely, that could not be intended. Was it really intended that the Orders of a body like the Army Council were to have the force of an Act of Parliament, so that any act which they did, and any Order which they made, or any regulation which they made, could not be appealed against? He was assured, the other day, upon legal authority that under this clause, even if the Army Council did something which was ultra vires, if it was taken before a 1404 Court of law, that Court of law would say that in the face of this clause it had the effect of an Act of Parliament, and therefore could not be considered by His Majesty's Judges. Surely that could not be intended. He believed he would be raising the point correctly if he moved to leave out the second word "Orders" in the first line
§
Amendment moved—
On page 23, line 33, to leave out the word 'Orders.' "—(The Duke of Northumberland.)
THE EARL OF ONSLOWDo I correctly understand that that is the only word in the whole clause which the noble Duke wishes to omit? The word "Orders" occurs again more than once further down. Perhaps the noble Duke will move that, in the first instance.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDThat was my idea, to move that in the first instance.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEI wonder whether the noble Duke has fully considered what the full effect of that Amendment will be? He desires that every Order made by the Army Council under this Act shall be laid on the Table of the House.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDsaid that was not what he intended; 'he had simply asked that an Order of the Army Council should not have the effect of an Act of Parliament. There was nothing in the clause about laying it on the Table of the House.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEOn this point I speak with diffidence, because it is a purely 1405 legal point. I think the noble Duke is unreasonably alarmed at what he thinks will be the effect of these words. They are words which are very frequently placed in Acts of Parliament, and I believe their legal force is not very great; they have very often been put into similar Acts of Parliament; and it has been found convenient in practice to have them in. As a matter of fact, the rather alarming effects suggested by the noble Duke could not and do not happen. The noble Duke, I understand, does not object to power being given to the Army Council to revise and vary the regulations. It is the fact that all Orders are to have the force of law to which he objects. I do not suggest it to the noble Duke, because I am not in a position to make any bargain with him upon the subject, but would not his object be more fully met by leaving in the word " Orders," and omitting the last words of the clause?
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDsaid he should be very happy to adopt the suggestion of the noble Earl, if it would have the effect which he desired; but he was afraid that would not be the case. If the noble Lord would tell him what he would accept, it would be of considerable assistance to him. What he thought was wanted was that in line 37 of Clause 34 the words " Orders " and " Regulations " should be left out. He thought that would meet the case.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWENot "Regulations," I hope. The word "Regulations" in any case ought not to be omitted; because, by the Interpretation Act, there is power to vary and revise Regulations in all Acts of Parliament, and there is no reason why that power should be different in this case. But I still do not understand the noble Duke's point. I understood that his objection was not to varying or revoking the Orders so much as to the fact that all orders and schemes of the Army Council should have the same effect as if they had been enacted in this Bill. But, if that be so, why does he propose to leave in those words and to leave out the word "Orders" only? Because he does not object, as I understand, to the power to vary an Order.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDwas sorry he had been so obscure. Perhaps, if he were allowed to read the clause, he could show what he meant. What he proposed to leave in the clause was as follows:—
All Orders in Council, orders, schemes, and regulations made under this Act may be varied or revoked by subsequent Orders in Council, orders, schemes, and regulations made in the like manner and subject to the like conditions, and all such Orders in Council and schemes, whilst in force, shall have effect as if enacted in this Act.He wished to leave out "Orders" and "Regulations." What he objected to was not their being varied, but their having the power of an Act of Parliament. He did not think they should give to the Army Council the power to make Orders and Regulations which were never to be laid before Parliament. He could quite see that the Army Council should have the power in question, but not that their exercise of that power should have the validity of an Act of Parliament.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDreplied that "scheme" had already the validity of an Act of Parliament.
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsuggested that the noble Duke should adhere to his original Amendment, and move to leave out altogether Clause 34
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDWould the Government assent to that?
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHYes.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDI am quite willing to take that course.
THE EARL OF ON SLOWThe noble Duke will observe that that will necessitate leaving out the words at the beginning of the clause, which the Committee have just agreed to insert.
§ *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEThe point appears to be a very difficult and technical one. But I think that many who sit here would think twice before we 1407 voted for the omission of the whole clause. The point whether "Orders" and ''Regulations" should be omitted in the penultimate line of the clause seems to be a matter worthy of consideration; and I should have thought the noble Lord in charge of the Bill would have undertaken to consider it before the Report stage.
§ *THE EARL OR PORTSMOUTHdid not desire to discuss a question in Committee which should have been decided by the House itself.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDsaid it seemed strange that the Government should attach great importance to preserving "Regulations," and yet should have no objection to striking out the whole clause, which struck out "Regulations" also.
§ *THE EARL OF CREWEI have a further suggestion to make to the noble Duke; that he should leave in the first four lines—
All Orders in Council, orders, schemes and regulations made under this Act may be varied or revoked by subsequent Orders in Council, orders, schemes, and regulations made in the like manner and subject to the like conditions"—and leave out the rest.
§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLANDsaid that would be satisfactory to him.
§ Clause as amended, agreed to.
§ Clauses 35 and 36 agreed to.
§ Clause 37:—
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUin moving that the provision in Subsection (4) that the Governor of the Isle of Wight should be ex-officio a member of the Association of the County of Southampton should be enlarged so as to include the Deputy-Governor, inquired whether the Government had noticed the strange effect which the clause as it stood in the Bill would have in regard to the Isle of Wight? The present Governor of the Isle of Wight was the Princess Henry of Battenburg; and it seemed hardly right for a Royal 1408 Princess to sit on an association and to take part in possibly turbulent proceedings. He suggested that the clause should read "Governor or Deputy-Governor."
§
Amendment moved—
In page 24, line 25, after the word 'Governor,' to insert the words or Deputy-Governor."—(Lord Montagu, of Beauties.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHsaid he quite saw the force of the proposed Amendment, and there would be no objection to making the alteration suggested by the noble Lord. He supposed there was such a person as a Deputy-Governor of the Isle of Wight?
§ Clause 37, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 38:—
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUmoved an Amendment to substitute "National Guard" for "Territorial Army" as a description of the Territorial Force. He said it was generally admitted in all quarters of the House that the term "Territorial Army" was not satisfactory; it was a tremendous mouthful and would never be pronounced properly when speechmaking commenced after dinner; it would be liable to all kinds of abuses, and he could foresee the Territorial Army in the future being called "Haldane's Terriers" or even "Haldane's Terrors." He did not wish that the force should start with a bad reputation by reason of having a bad name. There was a great deal in a name, as the noble Lord in charge of the Bill would admit; and he suggested that a better name might be found. For instance would not the name of "National Reserve" do very well? He had put down in his Amendment "National Guard," but he quite admitted that it rather suggested the French Revolution. It was, however, certainly a better name than the one which had been chosen.
§
Amendment moved—
In page 25, line 21, to leave out the word 'Territorial' and insert the words 'National Guard.' "—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)
§ *THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHasked whether it was really necessary for the House to sit up to that hour of the night to consider what would be the best name to use. It seemed to him that they might just as well leave in the words "Territorial Force," as substitute any others, because probably, whatever name was chosen for the force, the public or the soldiers themselves would give it a very much better name.
THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREsaid it seemed to him that it would be a great pity if the House made it impossible for the Force to be called "Haldane's Terriers."
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUconsidered it important to start with a good name, and he was sure that "Territorial Army" was not a good name.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ The Title:—
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU,who had proposed to substitute "An Army for National Defence" for "Territorial Force," said that this was practically the same point as he had raised on Clause 38. Perhaps the Government would consider whether they could find a word which would define the Territorial Army better than the words they had now got. He left the matter to them to consider.
§ Title agreed to.
§ Bill reported to the House, with Amendments.
§ Standing Committee negatived. The Report of Amendments to be received on Thursday, the 18th instant; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 102.)
§ House adjourned at a quarter before Twelve o'clock, till To-morrow, at a quarter past Four o'clock.