Page images
PDF
EPUB

6s. 4d. a day, which was next to starva- for Tynemouth (Mr. Trevelyan), in the tion. Now was that what hon. Gentlemen commencement of his speech, apologized wished to bring about? He had acted in for dealing with a question which had been common with the hon. and gallant Member formerly in the hands of so distinguished a for Aberdeen (Colonel Sykes), who had man as Sir De Lacy Evans, were quite seconded this Motion, in endeavouring to unnecessary. In the first place, the mode get the question of the Indian officers' in which the hon. Gentleman treated the claims settled. What was it that had led to subject was never exceeded for clearness the difficulty in that matter? The officers or candour; and, in the next place, it was suffered because under the system they impossible to forget that the hon. Gentlecould get no promotion, and so they agreed man is perhaps the fittest man in this to subscribe to a fund for the purpose of House to urge the views he has brought buying out the senior officers and enabling before us, being the son of Sir Charles them to retire more quickly. The Govern- Trevelyan, who, whatever difference of ment having failed to provide proper retir- opinion might prevail as to the merits of ing allowances, got the officers to do that this question, has, beyond all doubt, dewhich they themselves ought to have done; voted for a long period his great ability and all that was to save the half-pay list. and perseverance to its consideration, and Now, upon this question he was perfectly has done so in a manner which must have impartial. He did not belong to a purchase convinced everybody acquainted with what corps, he was getting on in years, and was he has written that he could have had no rather low in rank. Well, then, being other motive than one the most patriotic thus impartial, he could bear his testimony and disinterested. I am not at all disto this that it was the present system of paraging what has fallen from the hon. purchase which enabled us to officer our Gentleman opposite when I say that, havcorps with junior men, and when a man ing read what Sir Charles Trevelyan has was too old enabled him to retire. He written on this question, I am familiar not hoped this discussion would be carried on only with the arguments but even with the in a business-like manner. Let it not go extracts which the hon. Gentleman has to the country that the House was opposed brought forward with so much ability. I to seeing men raised from the ranks when am quite willing to admit, as the result of they had fairly gained their position. But my own study of this question, that it is imif they were to encourage promotion from possible to read the Report of the Royal the ranks let them place those who were Commission, the various correspondence of promoted in a position which would at Sir Charles Trevelyan and the pamphlets least enable them to live. The hon. and which he has published on this subject, gallant Gentleman (Captain Stanley) who without being convinced that there are had made so excellent a speech, had en- great and serious anomalies in this system tirely overlooked this point. When the of army purchase. There are many things Chancellor of the Exchequer was willing connected with that system which are fairly to grant a sum of money to enable them open to criticism, and which at least sugto promote men largely from the ranks, gest very serious doubts whether, if we he for one would vote for it. But it was were to commence anew, we should found entirely a matter of pounds, shillings, and promotion upon the purchase system which pence. Let it not go forth to the country now prevails. I need hardly add, therethat the House was of opinion that a non- fore, that I am by no means desirous to commissioned officer, when he received a be understood as committing myself to any commission, could live upon his pay, which approbation in the abstract of our present was something like what a first class mason system; and I feel it the more necessary could earn, a good deal less than a first- to say this, because if the hon. Gentleman class carpenter, and still less than a clerk presses his Motion to a division, I shall in a commercial house or bank would re- feel it my duty to vote against it. I canceive. If hon. Gentlemen really meant not think that the time has arrived when what they said, let them support a Motion it would be safe for the House to sanction for giving proper pay to the officers of the so strong a declaration as that embodied army, and then they would soon do away in the Motion which the hon. Gentleman with the purchase system. has submitted. While acknowledging the general fairness of his statement, I feel bound to take exception to the expression of which he made use when he urged, as

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON: Sir, both sides of the House will admit that the modest terms in which the hon. Member

These are facts which the hon. Gentleman should not, I think, have passed over when considering whether or not our military system might be improved by the abolition of this system. Upon another and by no means unimportant part of the subject the hon. Gentleman touched indeed, but not so fully as it deserved-namely, the expense which would be involved in the change which he proposes. My hon. and gallant Friend behind me (Colonel North) rather overstated the present value of the commissions held by officers in the army when he put it at £8,000,000, for,

one of his arguments against the present system of purchase and sale of commissions, that it was "illicit and clandestine." I presume the hon. Gentleman meant to refer not to the general system, but to the practice, which is unfortunately not unknown, of purchasing being carrried on to an excess inconsistent with law and regulation. It is very important that there should be no danger of its going forth to the public that the officers of the British army are carrying on anything that can be called illicit or clandestine in the sale and purchase of commissions, for it is under army regulations, and is perfectly legiti-as far as the last official statement enables mate. Every one, however, who takes an me to judge, the value according to regu interest in the welfare and character of our lation price is but slightly over £7,000,000. army must regret the fact mentioned by The question, then, arises, what proportion the hon. Gentleman, that, although there of this immense sum would have to be is an Act on the statute book which ren- repaid if the change were made. The view ders officers subject to be cashiered if they of Sir Charles Trevelyan is that a great purchase their commissions, and makes the number of officers would accommodate sale of them a misdemeanour at law, the themselves to the new system, and would offence of selling commissions for sums far be content to persevere in their military beyond the regulation price is not uncom- service, receiving full pay on retirement; mon. Whatever opinion may be enter- so that only a small proportion of that sum tained on the abstract question of pur- would have to be paid to retiring officers as chase, we must all agree that it is very compensation for the loss of their commisdesirable that such transactions should be sions. Upon that point, however, a differput an end to, and that law and practice ence of opinion exists. The subject has should be brought into harmony. While been referred to Committees on several our present system is no doubt in some occasions, and was in 1859 referred to a respects anomalous and objectionable, it is War Office Committee. They carried on a one, as the hon. Gentleman has reminded correspondence with Sir Charles Trevelyan, us, of great antiquity. He amused the and differed widely from him in many reHouse by referring us to the days of Pepys, spects. Sir Charles Trevelyan put the and to a negotiation carried on by him for sum which it would be necessary to refund the sale of his commission as Clerk of the at a much lower figure; but the ComActs. Now, the system of sale and pur-mittee were of opinion that a sum between chase of commissions in the army dates back from a period very nearly, if not quite, as remote as that; and with the exception of an interval of only four or five years in the reign of William III., it has prevailed from that time to the present day. That is surely a fact which ought to have some consideration. Then, again, it must be remembered the circumstance was entirely passed over by the hon. Gentleman, but it has been referred to by the hon. and gallant Members for Harwich (Major Jervis) and Westmeath (Mr. Greville-Nugent), that, whatever its merits or demerits, it has been under this system that the British army has acquired its great renown. Under that system it has during centuries achieved a glorious history, and has acquired such laurels as to give it a rank equal to or higher than any other army in the civilized world.

[ocr errors]

£3,000,000 and £4,000,000 would have to be provided out of the public Exchequer to repay officers for the sale of their commissions. When, therefore, we consider that it was part of Sir Charles Trevelyan's plan that the pay of all officers should be raised, and that in order to avoid stagnation in promotions officers should have full pay on retiring, and when we add to this increased expense a sum of no less than £3,000,000 or £4,000,000 for compensation, it is obvious that only a great concurrence of opinion could induce any Government to recommend Parliament to adopt a change of such magnitude. Now, at present, the opinion both of the military and the public is very much divided. I believe the preponderance of military opinion is, rightly or wrongly, in favour of maintaining the present system-whether the preponderance of public opinion is on

the same side I am not prepared to say. I caution in adopting the plan which the But, even assuming it to be desirable that hon. Gentleman has suggested, unless we the system should be abolished, it is clearly see our way to the avoidance of those evils one of such long-standing, and is so deep- to which I have adverted. Sir Charles rooted in the practice of the army, that Trevelyan attaches great importance to a until a much greater concurrence of public proper system of retirement, and it is quite and military opinion is arrived at the change clear that without such a system it would cannot be carried out. Another point on be extremely dangerous to expose our army which a difference of opinion prevails be- to the risks of the change which is protween those who have originated and those posed. I am quite aware that Sir Charles who have investigated the proposal is this Trevelyan does not admit that the cost is so -that while Sir Charles Trevelyan put great as I suppose; but there is a wide difthe retirements from the list of captains ference between us, and many high authoriat 500, the War Office Committee esti- ties differ from Sir Charles Trevelyan on mated them at no less than 2,000; so this subject, and are of opinion that the that before we can commit ourselves to changes he recommends would call for a such a measure it is necessary to under- great increase in our expenditure, and stand all its bearings. Another aspect of would largely augment the burden of the the question which has been alluded to by army. The objections to the purchase sysmy hon. and gallant Friend the Member tem may be divided into two classesfor Harwich (Major Jervis) is the danger first as to the effect upon the individual of impairing the vigour and efficiency of officer, and secondly as to its effect upon the army by increasing the difficulty of the public interest. The objection in repromotion. Now, we have before us the gard to the individual officer turns chiefly experience of three different systems of upon two points. The first is the hardship promotion-namely, those which exist in to officers of seeing juniors placed over the Navy, in the Royal Marines, and in their heads; and the other is the cruel loss the Royal Artillery and Royal Engineers; which the death of an officer involves, in and what do we learn from them? Why, the sacrifice by his family of the money that there is a great difficulty in keeping paid for his commission. There is no up a flow of promotion, and in at the same denying that in both these respects the time retaining in our service officers in the operation of the purchase system is very prime and vigour of life, when promotion hard upon officers. It is no doubt very is regulated by seniority. The hon. Gen- mortifying to officers fond of their profestleman referred to the French army; but sion and anxious for promotion to see their that, I think, is an instance unfavourable juniors pass over their heads. I am not to his views. There the plan has been sufficiently conversant with the profession adopted of compulsory retirement, at a to decide upon such a point; but it is comparatively early age, according to their gravely argued by those who know the rank. I believe a lieutenant-general is army well, that under the system of purcompelled to retire at sixty-five, a major- chase officers who are unable to buy are general at sixty-two, and so on, some of sometimes enabled to get their promotion the officers having to retire at fifty-three. quicker than they otherwise would do. If If my memory serves me right, Sir Charles this is a true view of the question, it goes Trevelyan has suggested a plan not very far to answer that portion of the argument. dissimilar. But how does it operate in the With regard to the cases where, by the French army? Officers are compelled to death of an officer, the family lose the retire, complaining and dissatisfied, and value of the commission, it must not be they are so reluctant to do so, on account forgotten that there is a great mitigation of the very inadequate allowances which of this hardship by the Royal warrant, they receive, that the junior officers do not under which the price of the commission is seek to be advanced, because the higher restored to the family where the officers they get the earlier the age at which they have been either killed in action or have must retire on an inadequate allowance; died within a certain period of time after so that, instead of the junior ranks being receiving their wounds. No doubt there filled, as in our army, by men in the prime must be cases of hardship; but it must of life, they are occupied by men who are not be forgotten that men enter upon their much older than is compatible with the in- career in the army with their eyes open terests of the service. Here, then, are to the risks they run. The strongest arwarnings which should induce the greatest gument in favour of the views of the hon.

Gentleman is the public bearing of this question in connection with the command of regiments. In the Report of the Royal Commission this subject is touched upon in a manner that deserves the most serious consideration, and there is a very strong passage, which I will read. They say

"The command of a regiment is an important trust, yet it is admitted by high authority that several officers have attained the position of lieutenant-colonel who were unequal to the command of the regiments which they held." The Royal Commission proceed, in the latter part of their Report, to give their views on the subject. They say

pledge on the Motion before the House in the face of this Report of the Royal Commission so recently made. Neither can I forget that I have the high authority of the Duke of Wellington in the Report of the Royal Commission on the same subject in 1840. That Commission, in their Report, said—

"It is manifested in these returns that by far the larger portion of officers are perfectly quali fied for their duties, and it is equally apparent that this efficiency is maintained by the system of purchase."

This Report is signed by the Duke of
Wellington, the Duke of Richmond, Lords
Melville, Howick, and Hill, Sir Charles
Adam, Sir Thomas Hardy, and Sir Henry
Hardinge, and other officers of the highest
consideration. The hon. Baronet the Mem-

"In this respect, therefore, we think that the good of the service will be best promoted by an alteration, and we recommend that hereafter the lieutenant-coloneley of a regiment should no longer be purchasable, but should be an appointment made by the selection of the Commander-in-ber for Buckingham (Sir Harry Verney) has Chief from all the majors in that branch of the service. The principle of selection may be most advantageously tried in the appointment to the command of a regiment. The Commander-inChief has, it is said, the means, through the information collected at head-quarters, of knowing the character for efficiency and intelligence of every field officer in the army. The responsibility of these appointments will rest on the Commander

in-Chief, and the attention of the whole army will be necessarily fixed on his exercise of this power."

Here is a distinct recommendation by the Royal Commission that in this respect a material change should be made. I think it is a matter of very grave doubt whether we ought to deal with this question piecemeal, and whether it is not better to leave it until we can grapple with the whole subject. You must recollect that it will be a change of the greatest magnitude, amounting to a revolution in our whole military system, and one that no one would recommend without the greatest care and the greatest deliberation. The Royal Commission says

expressed a hope that I will avail myself of this opportunity of considering the whole subject of Army Reform. This is a subject as difficult as it is important. I feel deeply how difficult and how important it is. This question of promotion by purchase cannot be considered to stand alone. Our whole military system at the present moment is in a state of transition. We have lately had presented to us the Report of a Royal Commission on our system of Recruiting for the Army. They name two objects of primary importance-one is, how to make the army more acceptable to the country and facilitate recruiting; the other is how to carry on recruiting without those degrading and demoralizing scenes which now unhappily attend it. Only the other day my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Huntingdon (General Peel) submitted a proposal for creating an army of reserve and improving the whole position of the British soldier. It will be my duty within a few days to lay on the table of this House "If the purchase system be abolished, it will the Report of a Commission, over which become indispensable, for the purpose of main- Lord Strathnairn presided, and which retaining the efficiency of the British army, to adopt commends very considerable changes in the a new system of retirement and promotion- administrative staff of the army. It will namely, to make retirement after a fixed age, or period of service compulsory, and to give promo- shortly be my duty to consider the recomtions by selection. It has been further shown mendations of the Commission. These rethat compulsory retirement will be alone an in- commendations cannot be carried out withadequate substitute for the sale of commissions; out very considerable changes in our milibut we consider that its partial adoption would facilitate the measure we propose for the selec-tary system. I hope the hon. Member for tion of lieutenant-colonels, while we do not suggest Tynemouth (Mr. Trevelyan) will see that I disturbing the existing system as regards the have no prejudiced views. Whatever may purchase and sale of commissions, up to the rank be the decision of the House to-night, I reof major inclusive." serve to myself the right to consider all those recommendations with regard to purchase in the army to the best of my ability. I have listened with attention and respect

Considering how short a time I have held my present office, it would be presumptuous on my part to commit myself to a distinct

1822

to the hon. Gentleman opposite. I have whole time when I had the honour to be
read the able publications of his father; connected with the War Office, or during
and I hope he will be of opinion that I only the three Sessions of Parliament, the sub-
wish to deal with the question with the ject of purchase in the army was never once
desire to arrive at the best decision. I mentioned within these walls.
therefore trust the hon. Member will not the condition of public opinion-and I be-
If such be
think it his duty to press this Motion to a lieve the silence on this subject has lasted
division.
hon. Friend whether it is not rather pre-
more than three years-I appeal to my
mature to ask us to come to a decision,
after one evening's debate, on so moment-
ous a matter?

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: I
cannot agree with what has been said by
the hon. Member for Westmeath (Mr.
Greville-Nugent) that these discussions
are calculated to do harm to the army.
On the contrary, I think that the country
is greatly indebted to the hon. Member
for Tynemouth (Mr. Trevelyan) for bring-
ing it forward, and in so able a manner.
I believe that discussion in this House and
in the country is the way, and the only
way, in which this question can be settled;
and that when once the subject is under-
stood in all its bearings by the House and
the country then, and not till then, the
question will be settled. I quite agree
with the right hon. Gentleman the Secre-
tary of State for War that this system of
purchase is full of anomalies and objec-
tions; and I believe that there is no true
friend to the army who would not be glad
to see the system abolished if we could
only devise a system without similar ano-
malies and objections. But, while I do
not hesitate to confess that that is my
opinion, I still do most earnestly join
with the right hon. Gentleman in asking
my hon. Friend the Member for Tyne-
mouth not to persevere to a division on
this question to-night. I think my hon.
Friend may be perfectly satisfied with the
support he has received and the discussion
which has followed his Motion; and I may
add that I think he may also be satisfied
with the tone of the speech just delivered
by the right hon. Gentleman. The right
hon. Gentleman has assured us that he
has no prejudice on this subject, and I
think we may understand his speech as a
pledge that he will take into his consider-
ation, among the other changes which he
contemplates for the organization of the
army, the possibility or expediency of
likewise introducing some changes in the
system of purchase. But, in pressing my
hon. Friend not to divide, I must say I
think that neither in this House nor out
of doors is public opinion ripe for coming
to a decision on this great subject.
surely some proof that the state of the
It is
public mind is not one in which this ques-
tion can now be decided, that during the

member what it is that is involved in this
question. Before the House can arrive at
any decision upon it it must know what is
the system which it is proposed to substi-
tute for the present one.
army, objectionable as it may be in many
Purchase in the
respects, no doubt affords a tolerably rapid
system of promotion in the service; and
something must be substituted for it if it
is to be abolished. It is easy to say you
will substitute a system of mixed selection
and seniority; but what is there involved
in that substitution? The House and the
country must be prepared to do certain
things which I do not believe it is at all
ready to do. We must be prepared, in the
first place, to pay the sum of money that
will be necessary to carry into effect the
plan proposed to be substituted; and be-
fore we can pay it we must know what
that sum is. I do not believe that my
hon. Friend or any Member of this House
is capable of forming an opinion at the
present time as to what sum the country
will be called upon to pay to get rid of this
system.

Let my hon. Friend re

pensation to officers for any pecuniary loss
However, you must pay com-
which may be suffered. In the next place,
you would probably have to pay, in addi-
tion to the regulated price of the commis-
sions, the extra price paid for them. In
the third place-and this, I think, is a part
of the subject which is rather forgotten-
you would have to provide an adequate and
liberal system of full-pay retirement, in
order to give the same amount of promo-
tion which is provided for under the pre-
sent system.
believe it is perfectly true, as stated by
And, in the fourth place, I
the hon. and gallant Member for Harwich
(Major Jervis), in order to do any good, in
order to reap any substantial advantage
from the change, it would be necessary
to revise your whole scale of pay and
say whether it may not be right for the
allowances to officers. I do not now
House to ask the country to incur such
an expenditure; but I ask whether the

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »