§ Mr. MACPHERSON
asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the fact that, notwithstanding the certificate prefixed to all official Army Lists to the effect that under the provisions of the Army Act of 1881, Section 163 (d), these lists are evidence of the status and rank of the officers mentioned in them, yet under the heading "Lieutenant-Colonels, with the honorary rank of Major-General," a large number of officers who, while on the Active List, had been for longer or shorter periods colonels in the Army, are shown as if they had never held higher rank than that of lieutenant-colonel in the Army while on the Active List; and whether he will see to it that these officers will in future be shown in the Army List as having held the rank of colonel?
§ Colonel SEELY
Retired pay officers are shown in the quarterly Army List in lists according to the highest substantive rank they held on retirement, and when they hold brevet or honorary rank superior to their substantive rank the highest brevet or honorary rank is shown against their names. The Army List, however, does not purport to show the history of the retired officers included, but only facts relevant to retirement. The officers in question, therefore, have their highest honorary rank, that of major-general, shown after their names.