§ Sir H. FOSTER
asked the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that many badly-wounded officers, through no fault of their own, were unable to obtain higher temporary or acting rank, whereas a number of officers of much junior rank to such wounded officers on the active list did obtain such rank, and now hold that rank on retirement; and whether he will consider the advisability of granting one rank higher without additional emolument, as in the Navy, above the permanent rank to all disabled officers up to the rank of lieutenant-colonel, retired through wounds, provided they held their permanent rank for at least one year prior to retirement?
§ Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS
I am well aware of the inevitable loss of oppor-58W tunities by wounded officers. By Army Order 376 of 1918, which dealt with the retention of acting or temporary rank on cessation of employment, special treatment was accorded to officers who were disabled by wounds or sickness due to the Service. I do not think any further concessions can be made, especially at this distance of time. The naval rule to which the hon. Member refers is not a special rule for disabled officers, but is part. of the general conditions of retirement for the Navy, which differ in many respects from those for the Army.