The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-07 00:00:00

readily at the disposal of the easy classes. Again, nothing
could be more erroneous than the aessitmptiott of the advocates

of abolition, that natipnrchasing oftcars wejsre all hard:-
working men, and that the max who pirehaged took no pains

with nor interest in his profession. (Hear, hear.) It was
also held out by the adiocates of abolition that by putting
an end to purchase we should get a different class of men
into the army from those who now held commissions, that
_ _ _

we should get the strong ambitious classes, men who would
bring an immense accession of force and energy into the
army; whilst on the other side it was asserted, with equal
confidence, that if you get rid of purchase, you would lose
the guarantee for your officers being gentlemen. (Cheers )

_ .
And he was one of those old -fashioned persons who believed
that the obtaining of gentlemen for the army was a matter

of great importance. (Loud cheers.) Ho believed that in
this country, which was not a military nation, and in which
therefore habits of military subordination were not general,

they could not give up the privilege of having officers to
whom men paid a willing obedience. (Cheers.) But he
believed that both the assertions were utterly without foun-
dation. Ho did not believe that if purchase were abolished

we should get a different class of men. it was said that

he army was an ill-paid profession. So it was in money,

but it carried with it position, honours, and social conside-
ration, and that would always attract a class of ;nen who
thought of something besides the pay. (Cheers.) There

were the officers of the navy; wherepurchase was unknown
and he appealed to the military officers present as to whether
they were not men of the class to which he had alluded ?
(Hear.) Was it true that the army was essentially aristo-
cratic? He had heard it said of the Indian army that it
was purely a middle-class institution; but what was the
Queen's army if it were not a middle-class institution ? The
presence of a few sons of noblemen did not alter its cha-

meter of belonging to the great bulk of the professiona'
and middle classes. Having premised thus much, lei
him add that he had been a member of the .Duke o
Somerset's commision, the report of which was drawn
up with great ability, and that report gave as fair an
account of the advantages and disadvantages of the pur-
chase system as any one would like to read. But when
he came into office, amongst many matters to which his at-
tention was forcibly called was the actual operation of the
purchase system in one arm of her Majesty's service. He
did not knew why he was accused of inveighing against the
purchase system, for he had listened attentively to every
scheme that was offered for the purpose of doing away with
a great scandal that overlaid the practice of purchase. As to
purchase, admitting that it quickened promotion immensely,
same one said that purchase did not produce physical vigour
and that it was not compatible with it. He did not admit
the fact, nor did ho find it proved before the commission
that purchase or no purchase had any effect in introducing
physical vigour into the service; but this he believed,
that if you abolished purchase, the supplemental mea-
sures proposed would be utterly insufficient to keep the
army in a healthy state. When he entered office he found
a controversy going on between the War-office and the
Treasury respecting the impossibility of attracting comets
into the service, there being then 60 odd vacancies, or the
officers of seven regiments. It was said that it was entirely
owing to making men pay their subscriptions in advance,
and to making them pay for forage. He then asked the
cost of outfit, and the estimates of experienced officers were
from £1,500 to £1,700, and he asked whether 17d. a day
would frighten away such men who were also in the course
of time to pay £17,000 for a lieutenant-coloneley. This
seemed absurd, and he had to look for some other cause.
He had listened with great attention to the speech of the
hon, and gallant member for Limerick, who said that the
cause of this great difficulty was not the price of the com-
mission, nor the forage, nor the subscription to the band,
nor even the expense of messing. It was, the hon. and
gallant member said, the expenses outside of the barrack-
yard. (Hear.) That was true, and the price of the com-
mission had nothing to do with that. It was the expensive
amusements of wealthy men, and he need not say that there
was nothing so efficacious as sumptuary laws as to such
expenses, or as a means of controlling young men. (Hear.)
It was the people who incurred those expenses who gave a
tone to the regiment, and it was only by reducing this ex-
penditure that the tone could be altered. He remembered
reading a passage in Carlyle's " Life of Sterling," in which
he said schoolmasters took credit for their administration in
producing the tone of their schoois. Carlyle said that was
all nonsense—it was the boys and not the men that did it,
not in obedience to the master, but often in spite of him ;
and so it was with officers. (Hear.) It was they who gave
the tone to a regiment, and the tone was to try by some
means to introduce fresh elements and a sounder public opi-
nion, to get men who could not afford to lead this sort of life,
and see whether then public opinion would not be strong
enough to neutralise the others, He was sorry that the
gallant officer (Sir De L. Evans) objected to his course,
when, on the contrary, he should have approved of it as a
stop in his own direction. He (Mr. Herbert) had lowered
the price of cavalry commissions one-third, and two more
moves of the same kind would be total abolition. (A laugh.)
The hon. and gallant member said that the plan would fail,
but he (Mr. Herbert) believed that it would turn out right,
as he knew that already there had been many applications
for cavalry commissions, and parents were paying to send
their sons from the infantry into the cavalry. What were
the abuses of purchase—that purchase which was so much
misunderstood both at home and on the continent ? He re-
membered reading in a French newspaper a review of the
life of the late Lord Raglan, in which it was stated that so
enthusiastic was the deceased for the welfare of the army
that alihough the son of a duke, he refused to enter the
service as a colonel, and came in as a mere ensign. (Laugh-
ter.) In the same way he knew it was thought in England
that a rich man going into a rigiment had only to hold up
his finger and he got whatever rank he wished—(hear,
hear)—following of course the order of the military hier-
archy, but passing over the heads of those who had not his
money. (Hear, hear.) But that was not possible except in
the lower ranks, and the whole of the lower ranks benefitted
by it. A man, for instance, who had risen from the ranks
found the army cleared before him by purchase. He was
purchased over, it was true, but not so much as he was pur-
chased away from. (Hear, hear.) When the first death
vacancy came he was ready, and when he obtained it he
might sell out, and the purchase money was a small for-
tune to him. This system might be indefensible, but it was
very convenient, and a proper substitute ought to be ob-
tained before you attempted any sweeping measure. (Hear.)
Where were the scandals ? Not in the lower ranks, but in
the great prices given for the higher by wealthy men, who
wanted station, and power, and position. This was what
caused the extravagant prices at which public opinion re-
volted. There was a case in the Blue-book, given by Lord
West—it was that of a colonel who wished to retire whilst his
officers were not ready to purchase. He is charged with
another regiment where the officers were rich, and then sold
out, while his best officers were all deprived of their step.
The Duke of Cambridge was blamed for this—(hear, hear)
—but the fact was that his royal highness laid his hands on
such proceedings wherever he could discover them. He
could not know, however, and it was months after, perhaps,
when he found that he had been consenting to this unfair
exchange. The system was complained of with justice, but
it was sometimes of advantage to officers who could serve in
England, but whe could not stand tropical climates, and by
it were permitted to exchange with men who were quite
willing td go. (Hear.) Let them recollect what was the re-
commendation of the Duke of Somerset's commission. That
commission recommended that in order to check these great
men, purchase should not be permitted to go beyond the
rank of major, and the reason given was that the purchase
of lieutenant-colonel was too important to be trusted to suc-
cession byeeniority. The gallant officer was opposed to senio-
rity. So was he (Mr. S. Herbert). He had always been op-
posed to it, and he was responsible for the introduction of a
system which he fairly admitted had been complained of,
that of employing lieutenant-colonels as brigadiers. These
things were, of course, disagreeable to the men who had
not been selected, but after all the public service was the
first thing to be considered, and the public service had cer-
tainly benefited by the change. The Duke sf Cambridge
was much opposed to selection, as incurring a responsibi-
lity which in this country it was impossible to bear. He
would prefer the seniority regiment, but then seniority often
placed a wholly unfit man in the all-important post of the
command of a regiment. What said General Simpson ?
He had had great experience in inspecting troops. He
said,—" T have known several officers who were unequal
to the command of the regiments that they held. I
cannot say whether they purchased or not." Being
asked whether the system of taking officers by
seniority would answer, he said it would not ; the remedy
was selection, but it would be a very serious and difficult
affair to pass over an officer. It was said to be easy for the
Commander-in-Chief to exorcise a veto on the appointment
of an unfit officer. (Hear, hear.) But what could be more
invidious than to tell a man, " You are a good officer ; I
have no fault to find with you ; but there is one still more
able, and I must pass him over your head." Or was he to
say, "I try you by an absolute standard, and you are so
entirely incompetent that I must pass you over ?". (Hear.)
Was not that invidious ? (No, no.) It was so invidious
that the Commander-in-Chief could not do it. General
Simpson said he had known in the course of his life two in-
stances only of this being done ; but he had known many
instances of officers being incompetent for their command.
At present officers had an interest in giving a larger price
for a lieut.-colonelcy than for any other rank. General
Scarlett was asked his opinion of selection as a remedy.
He said there was the greatest objection to these very large
sums being given for the higher ranks. He saw no objec-
tion to confining purchase to the lower ranks ; but he pre-
ferred selection to seniority, and he repeated that the sums
given were most injurious. to the service. They came to
this point. 'I hey had officers in the service in command
of regiments who, having arrived at them by seniority,
were not equal to the commands they held ; they had the
opinion of General Scarlett that selection for the higher
ranks would remedy that evil ; but they had the practice
of the authorities to show that it was impossible, as being
too invidious, to pass over a man because he was incompe -
tent, when they had no certain principles of selection. Very
great changes had been made in the system of promotion in
the last six years. Formerly an officer who rode to be a
captain, and then got a brevet, became lient.-colonel, colo-
nel, major-general, and so on. He might never have served
a day. If he served six years as a field officer, say major,
he might retire on his half-pay, or without a single day's
experience, he might become major-general, it was im- ,