The Sun.
London, England, 1849-01-05 00:00:00

ment ...£306,642 15 6
Special allowance to the colonel of the
Grenadier Guards, as borne on estab-
lishment ••• ••• •••
..••
Allowances to colonels for providing
clothing for augmentations ... ... 3,500 0 0
Allowances to colonels for providing
clothing to supernumeraries ... 3,000 0 0
Allowances to certain cavalry regiments
to cover deficiencies in the allowances
for providing clothing, &e. •••
Cost of patterns, marking great coats, &c.

1,850 0 0
400 0 0

Total for clothing ... ... 315,486 4 4
It became necessary at this point to explain in the
tract that this sum was not the " total for clothing ;"
that great coats (which are certainly a part of the
clothing of a soldier, in the financial, if not in the
military sense of the word) are charged for not in the
army estimates, though used by the army, but in the
ordnance estimates. It was also necessary to remark at
this point that while the public might suppose the sum
of 315,486/.45. 4d. to be expended in clothing the army,
as the common-sense reading of the estimate would lead
them to believe, such was not the case. The following
words were used:--" The colonels by whom the clothing
is provided are in most instances general officers, who
obtain the head colonelcies of regiments to provide the
clothing as a matter of trade and profit. They are in
the most literal sense of the expression, dealers in
clothes. When a regiment goes abroad, becomes sickly,
and is thinned by death, the clothing colonel to whom it
belongs, and who remains at home, receives the money
not required for dead or sick men, as his own emolu-
ment."
Is this that which is "false?" Is this the insult? If
it be false, it is worse than an insult. If it be true, those
who profit by the system must bear its odium. It is true.
Let us look at it more closely.
Major-General Napier signs himself " Colonel of the
27th Regiment." A reference to Hart's Army Register
shows that he "obtained his regiment" on the sth of
February, 1848. Consequently, he has not yet had it
one year, and may not know how much " emolument "
(the military word) or profit (the trade word) he will
receive. Circumstances, however, will guide him to form
an estimate, or any one else caring to know. Is the 27th
regiment serving in an unhealthy climate? And is its
numerical strength being reduced by death? If reduced,
how far is the number short of the full complement for
which he has drawn clothing money? The latest official
returns published are those of " Public Salaries," 1848,
referring to the previous year. Turning to these, it is
seen that the officer, a Lieutenant-General, who was then
Colonel of the 27th, had his pay and emoluments re-
turned by the War-office at 1,214/. 45., the pay as Colonel
being, fur such a regiment, about 5001,; the amount of
emolument, or profit, out of the money voted by Parlia-
ment, under the head of clothing, as quoted in Tract No.
4, would be 714/. 4s.
This regiment was evidently not at its full strength
then, else the emolument would have been only about
500/ , which, with he pay of 5001., would have given
the minimum income from this source of 1,000/. had
the regiment been as much reduced as the 22d was in
1843 (Sir Charles James Napier's regiment), the profit
would have been as high as 9421. 9s. Id. The pay of
500/., added to that sum, gave the clothing colonel, who
then held it, the amount, according to the Parliamentary
document, of 1,442/. 9s. Id.
It is to be remarked that most of these general
officers have other official incomes than the pay and
emoluments of the clothing department. Several made
" no returns," but as nearly as an average can be calcu-
lated, the emoluments from clothing are 75,0001. The
estimate, as voted by-Parliament, is therefore this much
more than necessary. And the pay of the clothing
colonels is 86,850/. 7s. Gd., varying from 1,8001. in the
household cavalry, to 5001. in the infantry of the line.
This experience is likewise unnecessary; if Sir William
Napier describes the duties of the colonels truly, they
seldom see, may possibly never have seen, their regi-
ment; they have no control over the quality, pat-
tern, or issue of the clothing; in short they do nothing—
they are permitted to do nothing.
Yet, probably, in respect of them, as the board of
general officers who inspect the clothing, and protect
the regiments from having an inferior article imposed
on them, the Major-General proves too much. No
imputation is cast upon that board of officers in the Fi-
nancial Reform Tracts ; they are not hinted at. But
as the Major-General chooses to appeal to their exis-
tence as a proof that a check upon the issue of cloth-
ing is established, it is not improper to point to the fact
in return that eleven out of nineteen of the members of
that board are in receipt of profits from clothing besides
their pay as colonels, of sums varying from 5501. to
876/. each.

General Napier's assertion, that the clothing in the
British army is better than in other services, proves no-
thing. Be it what it may, it is worse by 75,0001. a year
or thereabouts, than the country pays for. Its having
been the same from time immemorial only tends to show
the necessity for improvement.
Another part of that statement which Sir William
Napier pronounces in the Times to be "false," was, that
in cases where no profits arise to the colonels, because of
the superior quality of the clothing, allowances are made
to them accordingly. The official returns bear out this
statement to the very letter. The clothing is more costly
in the Life Guards than in the Ist Dragoon Guards of
the line ; and the pay of the clothing colonels is 1,8001.
each. It is more costly in the Ist Dragoon Guards than
in the 2d Dragoon Guards, and their pay is, in the
former 1,1001., while in the latter it is 1,0001. The
clothing is more costly in the cavalry than in the in-
fantry, and so 1,0001. and 900/. of pay is allowed in the
former instead of 5001. and largo profits in the latter.
Moreover some regiments, as the Grenadier Guards,
instead of allowing a profit on their clothing, require, s:
in the estimate, special allowance to the colonels,
borne on the establishment, 1,0931. Bs. 10d. And as the
1 1t h Hussars, whose scarlet trousers are extras, requireoo
and obtain in the estimates such an item as
the f
ing :—" Allowances to certain cavalry regiments fro cover
,
deficiencies in the allowances for providing clothing,
&c., 1,8501."
but which he referred to, and would
It was such items as these that lineditdh nportecqeduoiteg
paragraphs, which Sir William Nsorier d P
publio
have the
feE,

0 explain (and in doing so
detached, to do duty by
believe to be
'i'coh he did quote, ceased to have its
, rwritten) that though a certain sum
itself. It
platrbeagcram'a‘pfehalsweh.
tfhualltmpareaanginragp.anwda
voted for clothing the army, that cloth-
of money was
da part of what the soldier required;
cloth-
ing only formed hosierY, flannels, f -
forecsorwybell
that all linen,
stocks, b orage caps, bags ,
rushes, &c. *elect
were prey'
of the soldier 8 Pay.
out of is nothing ..
major
wbhriece ell 11/3:os:rnegfrel aiegsdr: etso—i:if:olfsapelrs'oe' '3
fi
sno that;
show
comp pecuniary itthisaat captainsfactT The
ha e no pecuniary interest in the issue of
those things to their men. The tracts of the association,
, did not say they had, nor
allude to them in any respect.
But it mentioned quarter-masters of regiments as
having a pecuniary interest in serving the soldiers with
those articles. It might have mentioned others
acting between the quarter-masters and the privates,
but did not. It stated that the clothing colonels of
cavalry regiments are also horse dealers; that they have
a profit on colts and fillies purchased young, and fed at
the regimental charge. The expression "horse dealer"
may be unpalatable, but it is true.
Those portions of the Major-General's letter stating
how the soldier is encouraged to complain to the in-
specting general, and, if he heeds not, to the Commander-
in-Chief, of the conduct of his regimental supe-
riors, or to his commanding officers, of any other officer,
do not come within the range of business before the
Financial Reform Association. But if any soldier in
the ranks be asked his opinion on those points it
will differ altogether from that of Sir William Napier.
A soldier who reports his non-commissioned officers to
their superiors, or any of the regimental officers to their
_
ho
superiors, is a " marked man." He makes to himselfi
a bed of thorns, on which he must lie so long as is n

the regiment—so it is said.
Sir William F. P. Napier concludes thus: " Such, air,
is the system established for the protection of the soldier
who has also the guarantee (no slight one in the British
army) of his officer's honour as a gentlemen. Will those
persons who have so wantonly and so recklessly assailed
that system and that honour, make public their system
t wards the poor labouring men, Women, and children,
from whose ceaseless toil they derive their own riches?
Will they publish a true detailed account of their truck
system'? Will they state what oars, what money, what