Captain CRAIGasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been directed to the wording of the Army Order, dated 20th March last, part of which prescribes: sash, gold and crimson, 2¾ in. wide, two outer rows of gold net, each ¾ in. wide, and a centre row of scarlet net 1¼ in. wide; what steps have been taken to correct such conflicting instructions; why was gold net, which pulls out of shape and is delicate and unreliable, chosen instead of gold lace, which is firmer and more suitable for such a sash; why was not the gold Infantry waistbelt, still possessed by many officers, to go with the present slings, reintroduced for ceremonial wear; and why were the leading military houses not consulted on this matter before the decision was actually arrived at, when the Order itself would have been more clearly worded, and the best choice would have been made?
§ Mr. ACLANDWith the exception of the substitution of "crimson" for "scarlet," it is not admitted that the order could have been made clearer in any way. It must be remembered that the supply is governed by the sealed pattern. Sashes always have been made of net, which is more lasting than lace. It is not considered desirable to reintroduce the old infantry waistbelt. The War Office is in touch with the trade in these matters, and the best choice has been made.