THE TERRITORIAL FORCE.

HL Deb 03 March 1910 vol 5 cc60-6

THE DUKE OF BEDFORD

My Lords, I rise to ask the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he can lay upon the Table of the House:

Firstly.—A Return of Special Reserve Infantry, showing—

1. (A) Officers:
1. 1. Establishment of Regular captains and subalterns for the Regular establishments of—
   1. (a) Special Reserve Battalions.
   2. (b) Extra Special Reserve Battalions.
   Number required to complete establishment in (a) and (b).
61
2. 2. The number of Special Reserve and Extra Special Reserve lieutenants and second lieutenants required to complete the establishments of—
1. (a) Special Reserve Battalions;
2. (b) Extra Special Reserve Battalions.
3. 3. The number of officers who have joined the Special Reserve Infantry from the Officers Training Corps.
2. (B) Non-commissioned officers and men:
1. 1. Total strength of the Special Reserve Infantry on the 1st of March, 1910.
2. 2. Number of Special Reservists included in this total who were transferred from the Militia.
3. 3. Number of recruits enlisted between 1st January, 1909, and 1st March, 1910.
4. 4. Number of such recruits passed to the Royal Navy or Regular Army.
5. 5. Number of such recruits discharged between 1st January, 1909, and 1st March, 1910, as—
1. (a) Medically unfit;
2. (b) For any other reason.
6. 6. Number dismissed to their homes on completion of five or six months training.
7. 7. Number of such men above twenty years of age.
8. 8. Number of Special Reserve Infantry recruits under training at the Depôts on 1st March, 1910.
9. 9. The number of Special Infantry Reservists who became—
1. (a) Time-expired between 1st January, 1909, and 1st March, 1910;
2. (b) The number who re-engaged.
10. 10. Number of Special Reservists Infantry who were rejected on application to join the Regular Army owing to medical unfitness.
11. 11. Number of Special Reservists Infantry who have been attested for the Regular Army by recruiting officers but on subsequent examination by medical officers have been rejected, and have then been re-enlisted into the Special Reserve as medically fit for the Army Re serve.

Secondly.—A Statement; of the Extra Battalions of the Special Reserve showing—

1. (A) The strength of the Extra Special Reserve Battalions on the 1st March, 1910.
2. (B) Differences between strength and establishments.
3. (C) The number of non-commissioned officers and men under twenty years of age.
4. (D) The number of non-commissioned officers and men who have re-engaged between 1st March, 1909, and 1st March, 1910.
5. (E) The number of non-commissioned officers and men who have become time-expired between 1st March, 1909, and 1st March, 1910. (Similar to [Cd. 4497.] of 1909.)

Thirdly.—A Statement showing the number of officers deficient in all branches of Special Reserve on 1st March, 1910, giving their respective ranks, and the number of non-commissioned officers and men deficient, similar to the Army Officers (Deficiency) Return rendered on the 2nd March, 1909.

Fourthly.—A Return of the Territorial Force to show on the 1st March, 1910—

1. (A) Number of officers, non-commissioned officers and men serving in all branches, combatant and non-combatant, in comparison with their establishments.
2. (B) Number of officers, non-commissioned officers and men now serving under twenty years of age.
3. (C) Number of officers, non-commissioned officers and men now serving on a one year engagement.
4. (D) Number of men whose period of service expires in July, 1910.
5. (E) The number of officers, non-commissioned officers and men who—
1. (a) Have not yet completed the recruit's course of musketry;
2. (b) Have completed the recruit's course, but have not completed the annual course;
6. (F) In accordance with the Army Order of January, 1910—
1. (i) The number of non-commissioned officers and men in the Territorial Infantry who have accepted the badge for service abroad;
63
2. (ii) The number of such men to whom the badge has been given but who are not available for foreign service on account of being less than twenty years of age.

The four Returns for which I move were rendered to Parliament last year in almost the same form as that for which I now ask. The first Return deals with the Special Reserve, and the noble Lord will recognise that it is almost the same Return as that which was rendered in April of last year to Mr. Arnold-Forster, with this exception—that I am asking for the number of officers, whilst the Return granted to Mr. Arnold-Forster was limited to non-commissioned officers and men. Numbers 10 and 11 in the first Return for which I ask are designed to give information as to how many men are now in the Special Reserve who are medically unfit for the Army—that is to say, the number of men who are medically unfit for the Army in time of peace, but who are considered fit for the Army in time of War. This information, as I know from my own experience of work at the regimental depots, can be very easily supplied. In the second Return I ask for a statement of the extra battalions of the Special Reserve precisely in the same form as the Return which was rendered last year. The third Return which I request the noble Lord to lay upon the Table was known last year as the Army Officers (Deficiency) Return, and was rendered on March 2. I ask that that Return should be brought up to date. The fourth Return concerning the Territorial Force is in almost the same form as the Return which was granted to my noble friend Lord Newton, with the exception of the addition of those men in the Territorial Force who have undertaken the obligation to serve abroad. I also ask for the number of such men who, being under twenty years of age, are not available for foreign service.

I have also a Notice on the Paper calling attention to a paragraph which appeared in the Morning Post of December 17, 1909, to the effect that Mr. Harold Harms-worth, who, early in the year, gave the sum of £10,000 to the Chairman of the Territorial Force Association, County of London, for recruiting purposes, had sent a further sum of £5,000 to the association for the same object. I wish to ask the Under-Secretary of State for War if, in the event of the statement being correct, he can state how much money was paid either by the association or by any person acting under the association to (a) bringers of recruits; (b) recruits.

THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (LORD LUCAS)

My Lords, I would like to say a word or two about the Return for which the noble Duke has asked. As he says, all the information that he desires was supplied for the corresponding periods last year, and there is, of course, no military objection whatever to providing it. But the preparation of these Returns last year brought out a fact of which, I think, we were to a certain extent ignorant when we granted the Returns—I refer to the enormous amount of work entailed in providing the information in exactly the form in which the Returns were moved for. I do not in the least desire, however, to withhold from the noble Duke or from the House any information which may be required on these subjects. We can supply all the information the noble Duke seeks to obtain if the form in which it is asked for is in certain cases slightly modified; and if he would allow us to confer with him on the question we could probably arrive at a slightly modified form which, while giving all the information sought for, would throw a great deal less work on the record offices and upon the headquarters of the Territorial Force. I would therefore suggest that the noble Duke should do us the honour of paying a visit to the War Office, when we might confer on the question, and, I hope, come to a conclusion which would be satisfactory to him and at the same time save our people a great deal of work.

In reply to the noble Duke's Question concerning the gift to the London County Association, I have to say that the War Office has no official knowledge of the matters referred to in the Question. I may add, however, that I am informed by the London County Association that the money in question was not given to the Association to administer, but to the chairman to apply exactly as and how he personally saw fit for the benefit of the Territorial Force in London. The Association as a body has neither knowledge nor control over the administration of the fund, and it was only on this specific understanding, as contained in a letter from the donor, that the sum was placed at the chairman's disposal. The money stands in the names of Lord Esher and Mr. Martin Holland, who jointly administer it, and the account is duly audited. The chairman of the County Association informs me that, while considerable sums have been spent to encourage recruiting, the money was not expended in the manner suggested in the latter half of the Question. Owing to what was called the "recruiting boom" of last year direct payments of the kind suggested were Unnecessary. The chairman, however, asks me to add that, except for this fund, it would have been impossible, in his opinion, to have raised the numbers of the Territorial Force in London to their present strength.

THE DUKE OF BEDFORD

I am much obliged to the noble Lord for his promise to grant the information for which I ask, and I shall have much pleasure in calling upon him at the War Office and conferring with him as to any modification in the form of the Returns. With regard to the noble Lord's answer to my second Question, mae I remind him that paragraph 684 of thy Regulations of the Territorial Force provides that "an account of the receipt and expenditure of money received from private sources, either for general or specific purposes, shall be kept in suitable form and audited." Am I to understand that this Regulation does not apply to this particular sum?

LORD LUCAS

That is so. It does not apply on account of the conditions under which the money was given.

House adjourned at twenty minutes before Five o'clock, till Tomorrow, half-past Ten o'clock.