some other cause, he might not have been
distinguished as a major. The general in
command on the station might think that
the claims of this officer to the command
of the regiment were very good, and might
remonstrate against his supersession, or
give him strong testimonials which would
make him a discontented man for life
with an exceedingly good grievance.
must think that the probability of the
occurrence of such a case affords a very
strong argument against our having re-
course to a system of selection. In order
to show the House the difference between
the English and French armies in this
respect, I will read a few lines from the
Report of the Commissioners. Speaking
of the French army, they say—

"Selection is governed by the following regulations:-Inspectors general are appointed for every branch of the service; they are specially named for this duty, and are not the officers who command the district. These inspectors receive a printed form of instructions before they commence their annual tour of inspection. When an inspector general has inspected a regiment, the commanding officer of the regiment presents to him his list of officers for promotion; the inspector general examines these officers, and selects those whom he considers most fit; he then prepares a confidential report, and transmits it to the Minister of War. When all the inspections are finished, the inspectors meet in committee, review the names in these several reports, and from among them prepare a list for the Minister. The Minister promotes them in rotation, or not, as he thinks best."

pose that the officers of our army are principally, or in any large degree, taken from the aristocratic class, in this sense of the word. I do not at all believe that the purchase system has produced that narrowing effect which the hon. and gallant Officer attributes to it. There is another advantage arising from the purchase system to which military men attach great importance, which perhaps a civilian is not able to appreciate as well as a military man; but which, nevertheless, I believe to be a very solid and substantial benefit-namely, what is called the regimental system, according to which promotion takes place in a regiment, the officers live together in a manner which is not usual in foreign armies where there is no mess, and altogether an esprit de corps and mutual confidence and familiarity are produced, which tend very much to the efficient working of our military system. It is often said how absurd it is to have purchase in the army when you do not have it in the navy. Now, there is this great difference between a regiment and a ship-that a ship is paid off when it comes into port, and its officers fluctuate from time to time. There is a continuous unity in a regiment which a ship cannot possess, and which is undoubtedly promoted by a system of purchase. There is another great practical difficulty in the way of appointing lieutenant colonels by selection, growing out of the manner in which our army is employed abroad. If our army was like that of France or Prussia, the adoption of such a system would be much easier than it now is. A large part of our army is permanently abroad. How would the principle of selection operate in regard ful consideration of their reports. Such a scheme to it? Let the House suppose that a could hardly be applied to the British army. Inlieutenant colonel dies on his station inspectors could not be sent annually from the New Zealand, or at Hongkong, Pekin, or some other distant part of the world? The senior major would, as a matter of course, succeed to the command of the regiment. The vacancy would immediately be reported home, and probably in about six months, or a longer interval from the death of the officer, a successor, appointed by selection, would arrive out to take the command, and to supersede the officer who had commanded the regiment for six months, and who might have greatly distinguished himself in the interval. Hostilities might have broken out, and the officer might have shown that he was eminently qualified for the post of a commander, although, from indolence or

That is the system of the French army, of which the Commissioners say very truly

"In imitation of the French system, it may be suggested that special inspectors should be appointed to visit and examine the regiments, and that all promotion should be based upon a care

Horse Guards to visit regiments dispersed from
Canada to Australia.”

I think the House will see at once that
any system of inspection of this kind for
our army would be altogether inapplicable.
In the French army, the chief part of
which is confined to the limits of France,
such a system is perfectly practicable, and
no doubt works satisfactorily; but the
peculiar service of our army renders it
altogether impossible. Supposing the Com-
mander in Chief deprived of the assistance
which he might obtain from the reports of
inspectors, and were to decide promotions
on what is called merit, how would he bo
able to select officers for the command of
regiments without exposing himself to the

charge of favoritism, or without being subjected to perpetual pressure from private or political friends? Either there would constantly be intelligible suggestions conveyed in the newspapers, or perhaps in the form of Questions or Motions in the House; and if in the midst of all these serious difficulties the Commander in Chief found himself not equal to the responsibility of selection, I am rather inclined to think that what is called merit would assume the shape of simple seniority. My hon. and gallant Friend, I think, said that the present officers of the army had great reason to complain, because they had been induced by the Government to evade the law declaring that money shall not be given for their commissions. He seemed to think that, as a matter of fact, the Government were perpetually pressing and urging officers into the system of purchase, which was not one that was at all sanctioned or approved by the feeling of the army, or into which they would be disposed to enter spontaneously, and without the constant application of this supposed pressure by the Government.

That was

senior officer to retire. Contributing is optional on the part of every officer; but in most cases a venience than withhold his aid from a scheme so young man would sooner incur pecuniary inconpopular in the regiment. The practice of thus making up a purse applies chiefly, it is said, to the rank of major, though it occurs also in lower ranks. From the evidence given as to the effects of this system, and the unwillingness of officers to retire without a contribution, in addition to the pension allowed them, it may be inferred, that if the officers of the Indian army were left with no other inducement to retire except the allowance granted by the Government, the regiments would be filled with old officers and the efficiency of the army would be impaired."

These Commissioners, from the nature of their recommendation, cannot be supposed to speak with any prejudice in favour of the system of purchase. Even in the Indian Artillery this system has also been introduced, though it does not exist in our Artillery, and therefore I think it must be seen that there is a spontaneous tendency to introduce a system of this sort, unless it be checked by the Government and prohibited by strict penal regulations. But however strict the regulations may be, I hardly anticipate that means might not be the picture my hon, and gallant Friend found of evasion; and it is doubtful whedrew of the working of the system. Ither, after all, the entire eradication of the do not mean at all to dispute his greater system of purchase, sanctioned as it seems experience and greater knowledge of mili- to be by the opinions and practice of the tary affairs, but my information leads me army itself, would be as easy as many These to think that the state of things is directly hon. Gentlemen seem to think. opposed to that which he has described. are the reasons which induce me to hesiI do not believe that the system of pur- tate at the present moment in taking any chase is one that is forced on the army by additional step for giving effect to the dethe Government, or to which the army cision that has been adverted to. itself is hostile; and I think that a very not at all say that the question is closed, strong argument in the other direction may or that it would not be expedient under be afforded by the practice of the Indian other circumstances; and when some few army, the European regiments of which years have shown what is the working of were non-purchase corps, but into which the system of non-purchase in the twelve the system of purchase was nevertheless new regiments, that it would not be posintroduced by the officers themselves. In sible to introduce a change both in this order that I may not be supposed to mis- and other branches of the service. But represent this question, I shall read a few on the grounds I have stated Her Mawords from the Report of the Commis- jesty's Government are not prepared to sioners. They saytake any immediate steps. Therefore it is not in my power to assent to the Motion of my hon. and gallant Friend, and I must give my vote in favour of passing to the order of the day, which is equivalent to moving the Previous Question.

"The strict adherence to the rule of promotion by seniority has led to the adoption of a practice which is permitted by the authorities, though not sanctioned by law, and which produces, as regards retirement, a result somewhat similar to the sale

of commissions."

The House will observe that this is entirely a voluntary system introduced by the army itself, and one only tolerated and not dictated or encouraged by the Government.

The officers of a regiment subscribe among themselves, and make up a purse to induce a

I do

GENERAL PEEL: Sir, if I agreed, which I do not, with the recommendations of the Commissioners, I should object to this House being called on to give any opinion or to exercise any influence with regard to a matter purely relating to the command aud discipline of the army. In that view

66

There may be unfairness in selection, but one has a right to expect that men in a high station would select proper and fitting men. Men who are passed over at any time may not like it, but give less pain and less cause for regret and disstill I think that the principle of selection would pleasure on the part of the individual than being purchased over.

I now come to the other side of the question. First there is the evidence of Sir Charles Yorke. Then the opinion of Lord Raglan was stated by the Chairman of the Commission, the Duke of Somerset. There are no two men whose opinion is of greater weight on this subject, because they had filled the post of Military Secretary, and through the Military Secretary all the confidential reports of the army pass to the Commander in Chief. Well, Lord Raglan says

I am fully borne out by the opinion of the which I should do to that of military offilate Secretary for War, Lord Herbert, who, cers. Sir Duncan M'Dougall thought a in answer to a question put to him, I think system of selection desirable but not pracby the hon. and gallant Member for Lime- ticable. Sir James Scarlett, to whose rick (Colonel Dickson), said the army was opinion I should attach the greatest imgoverned not by the votes of the House of portance, thought a system of selection Commons but by the Queen's regulations, preferable to purchase in the higher ranks; and that he would not be doing his duty if but, with regard to the army generally, he he produced any regulations for discussion in thought examination would be better than the House before they had been decided on selection. That view, however, I do not by the Queen in Council. I hope and trust think practicable. Lord Clyde, whose this House will never interfere with the com- opinion must carry great weight with mand and discipline of the army. I am per- every one, declared thatfectly content to take the Report of the Commission on its own merits. It consisted, I recollect, of ten individuals, five civilians and five military men; but one of those civilians had been Secretary at War, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Coventry (Mr. Ellice). We find that the Report and recommendations of the Commission were only signed by six out of the ten members. The majority of the military members of the Commission absolutely put in a counter Report, in which they objected altogether to the recommendations which were adopted by the majority; and, of the civilians, the right hon. Gentleman who had been Secretary at War objected just as strongly to those recommendations. Therefore the House, I think, is bound to scrutinize narrowly the grounds on which the Royal Commission came to that decision. They held in their Report that they were borne out by the practice of foreign armies, as well as our own in India; but the right hon. Gentleman has shown very clearly that it is impossible to compare the foreign with any English service. Foreign officers are collected together, and there may be good opportunities for selecting the best officers. With regard to the Indian army, I think what has taken place there lately would hardly induce us to exchange the system of the British army for any which may exist in India. The Commissioners were certainly wise in giving some other grounds for their decision than the mere evidence which came before them, for I venture to think the opinion which they came to was in direct contradiction to the weight of evidence. Five gentlemen gave evidence in favour of the proposed change; two of them were civilians, amateur reformers of From this the House is put in possesthe army, who had paid great attention to sion of the opinion of a French officer the subject; and I am perfectly willing to who had an opportuntity of observing admit that they gave their honest opinion. the working of our system as well as But they must excuse me if I do not attach that which prevails in the French the same importance to their testimony army. I shall not go into the finan

"We consider that the system of selection would be highly prejudicial to the efficiency of the army. I should be sorry to see the system of selection introduced under any circumstances in this country. I think it would lead to great abuse.” Then came Major General Neil and Lieutenant Colonel Ringham. I will not, however, weary the House by going through the evidence of every military man of distinction, but I beg to call attention to the statement of Sir H. W. Barnard on the system of selection :—

"I think that the system of selection would be decidedly not so popular in the army as that of that it would be a very onerous duty upon those purchase; that it could not be carried out; and who would have to select." He quotes the opinion of a French officer of high rank in the Crimea,

"Who was surprised at a party in England wishing to alter our system, and to do away with purchase. He had never seen any infantry to equal the British.”

cial arguments, because I think the war, from the rank of lieutenant to that question which we have to consider is of lieutenant colonel, and yet, distinguished whether it would be for the advantage as were the services of my hon. and galof the service that appointments to the lant Friend, I do not say that there were rank of lieutenant colonel should be by not other officers who would have made selection. Viewing the matter in this a good a lieutenant colonel as he. I think light, I would ask what would be the po- we ought to be very cautious indeed how sition of the two majors of a regiment we interfere with that which before the when you had taken an officer from an- Crimean war was admitted to be almost other regiment and placed him over their perfect-the regimental system. The House heads? What would their position be will remember, too, that there is now an when you had pointed out to the men examination before an officer enters the under them that you did not think these army, and that there is a professional exofficers fit to command & regiment? There amination for every grade up to captain; is the circumstance on which my hon. and so that it would be almost impossible for gallant Friend laid so much stress,-that an inefficient man to obtain the rank of the command of a regiment in action field officer. But what would be said to might decide the fate of the day. Well, an examination by a gallant officer whom if this officer whom you had selected to you yourselves had declared not fit to comcommand the regiment was killed, the senior mand a regiment? For the reasons which major, whom you had pointed out as not fit I have ventured to state to the Ilouse, I to command the regiment, would be called think the Government exercise a wise disupon to perform that duty. Indeed, I cretion in not agreeing to the proposition cannot conceive any man so passed over of my hon. and gallant Friend. remaining for one single moment in the position in which he would be placed. If he is not fit to command a regiment, he is not fit to be senior major. Again, let us look to the effect of this system on the regiment itself. If you do not promote the senior major, what is to become of the second major? It would be a very hard case with him, because, as long as the senior major remained in the regiment, there would not be the slightest chance of his being promoted. Suppose the lieutenant colonel is killed in action, and that you bring in an officer from another regiment to fill his place; the promotion takes place in the latter regiment, and not in that in which the vacancy by death has occurred. It would be much better to say to an officer, "We do not think you are exactly the man whom we should wish to see command a regiment," than to allow him to go on expecting his promotion, and then pass him over when the opportunity arose. By adopting the former course, you would afford him an opportutunity of retiring from a service in which he had no chance of advancement. A man may be very gallant in action-he may do acts that entitle him to the Victoria Cross, and yet he may not be as fit to command a regiment as a man who had not so distinguished himself in action; but, depend on it, that would not be the view taken by the country. My hon. and gallant Friend (Sir De L. Evans) himself was raised in one year, during a time of

COLONEL NORTH observed, that all appointments in the higher grades must necessarily to a certain extent be made at haphazard. Still, from the confidential reports made after the half-yearly inspection, the Horse Guards was thoroughly informed as to the efficiency of majors of regiments. In a former debate on that subject, the practice of exchanges was relied on as an argument to show that under the present system an officer was brought from one regiment and put over the heads of those in another; but it would be impossible, without the destruction of the prospects of many officers, to do away with exchanges. One regiment had to do duty in various climates, and their removal from one climate to another was often very rapid. During the Russian war, troops were sent from the Cape of Good Hope to the Crimea, and at the close of that war they were sent to India to assist in putting down the mutiny. On a former occasion the hon. and gallant General put the case of an officer without money or friends, and asked what chance of promotion he had under the purchase system. But what chance would such an officer have under the system of selection? The noble Lord at the head of the Government had, on a previous occasion, stated that merit was only the opinion which one man formed of another, that any opinion was sure to be disputed, and that it was a utopian idea to suppose that under any system individuals could be selected on account of merit alone.

That