in commissions under the army regulations, might be allowed to receive, in addition to the sale 1392. A lieutenant-colonel who has not purchased is also allowed to sell, but he having expended no money, receives in the purchase money a reward for his services?—Yes. 1393. Do you conceive that any disadvantage will result by adopting the plan now suggested, from increasing the comparative advantages of the monied men who can purchase over men that cannot purchase ?-When I answered the questions, I thought it might be a little invidious, an officer who has purchased getting a reward, and an officer who retires, not getting anything. 1394. Already by the existing system of the army very great advantage is given to wealthy men?-Yes. 1395. Do you think that it might have a tendency to create a bad feeling amongst those who are without money for purchasing, if the advantages already enjoyed by men of wealth were still further increased by adopting such a regulation as has been described?-I should prefer, myself, that they should be kept together. 1396. Has not the monied officer already had his reward in this shape, namely, that by means of his money he has had early promotion and its advantages, whilst the officer who has not had money has been later in obtaining promotion ?-Certainly. 1397. Therefore, when the two officers are required to sell out, the one having served in the inferior ranks a longer time than the other, and the other in all probability having stepped over his head, and acquired honours and rank much earlier, are you of opinion that the two, when they come to sell out, ought to be upon an equality ?—That is what I thought. I think it balances itself in the end. 1398. Exclusive of the efficiency which results to the service by the system of purchase in the infantry and cavalry, are you of opinion that, in a financial point of view, the rich are actually paying for the retirement of the poor officers, by enabling the poor officer to sell a lieutenant-colonelcy for £4500, he, perhaps, never having purchased his commission?—Yes. 1399. Therefore, it is the rich officer who really pays for the retirement of the poor officer? -Yes. 1400. Consequently, there is a financial advantage to the public, as well as the military advantage of efficiency, to which you have already adverted?—Yes. 1401. With respect to the retirement of the subalterns upon the reduced pay of captain, supposing a subaltern has purchased his lieutenancy for which he pays £700, you deprive him of that sum according to that system?—Yes; but then he gets his pay after he has purchased, and he receives a very good interest for his money, and he performs certain duties for it. 1402. And then at the end of 21 years you force him to retire upon very little more than his pay, and you deprive him of his commission, for which he has paid?-He may have the option of selling the company given to him. From lieutenant you promote him to be an unattached captain, and I should let him then either sell or remain in the service; I would give him that option with the chance, if he retires, of being brought in again as captain. 1403. How long were you in the army before getting your major-generalship?—I came into the army in 1794, and I was major-general in 1825. 1404. Did you purchase many of your steps?-I only purchased my majority. I paid the difference once as captain. 1405. Do not you think at this moment there are many old lieutenant-colonels and majors in the army holding their commissions merely because they feel that they should only get back the money that they have expended, and thereby stopping promotion?-I think there are; I think they are always looking forward with a hope that something is going to be done for them. 1406. Your proposition, as now explained, of allowing a subaltern, after 21 years' service, to retire on the unattached rank of captain, with a proportion of the pay of captain, is, to a certain extent, the system that now prevails in the East India Company's service, in which every officer, having served for 23 years, is allowed to retire upon the rank and full pay of a captain?-Yes, after 21 years' service. 1407. Supposing a subaltern of Her Majesty's service, after 23 years' service, to retire at present, what would he retire upon according to the existing regulation?—He would retire upon the half-pay of a subaltern. 1408. Instead of, as in the East India Company's service, upon the full-pay of a captain? -Yes, that is the position he is in. 1409. Supposing that he has the option of selling his lieutenancy, which is 700l., would that be a compensation for the loss of the annuity of the full-pay of a captain?-No, it would not be anything in proportion. 1410. There is, however, one distinction to be drawn between the two services, that the officers of Her Majesty's service may have served only a short time abroad, whereas 20 years in the Company's service must have been passed in the East Indies?—Yes. . 1411. But exclusive of that circumstance, the advantage to the subalterns in the Company's service is as you have stated?—It is. 1412. Have you ever received any prize-money in the course of your service, and if so, upon N. M. C. M Examinations. . Lieut.-General the Right Hon. Sir E. Commander of the Blakeney, K. C. B., Forces in Ireland. 24th July 1838. Examinations. Lieut.-General the what occasion, and to what amount ?-I received for the West Indies 1807., at Martinique; I received for Copenhagen 7301.; I received for the Helder fifty odd pounds; and I received for the Peninsula more than 400l. I think I have been very fortunate, more fortunate than others. 1413. When you were in Copenhagen, the troops you were with were embarked as marines, were they not? There were some, but I was not. 1414. It was when you were landed?-When we were landed, the prize-money for the shipping and stores. 1415. What were you in ?-In the fusiliers. 1416. Are you of opinion that a system of brevet promotion, after an officer has acquired the rank of lieutenant-colonel, should, as at present, go by seniority, or would you introduce any system of selection, such, for instance, as an officer having greatly distinguished himself in the field?-I think I should adhere to the present system. I should be afraid of the other creating great dissension and disappointment on the part of the others. I think the circumstance of a man in the field getting promotion upon the spot is very stimulating, but I think the other is very questionable. 1417. The exception to promotion by selection or by purchase, stopping at the rank of lieutenant-colonel, is in the case of the sovereign's aides-de-camp; would you allow a Commander-in-chief in the field to recommend a lieutenant-colonel to the sovereign for the brevet rank of colonel as he now does for the two inferior ranks, with a view to obtain active and distinguished major-generals at an earlier age?—I should be afraid of that exciting great dissension among the seniors. I should prefer a retired list a great deal. 1418. Have you ever found that promoting a major to be lieutenant-colonel by brevet, when acquired by service in the field, has on just ground given any mortification to others?—I think it very frequently has. 1419. Has it had that effect in such a proportion of cases as would justify an abolition of that system of giving brevet promotion for merit in the field?—I think for distinguished service in the field it is desirable to do it at the moment, but I do not think I should take out of the list of officers certain officers to promote them. 1420. That selection at present extends up to the rank of lieutenant-colonel; where is the objection to extend this power of the general commanding an army in the field to recommend a very distinguished lieutenant-colonel for the rank of full colonel?—I do not see an objection to it, if it is done on serviee in the field, if the general Commander-in-chief chooses to promote him to a colonel; but I think it ought to be for really distinguished conduct in the field, not for any thing else. 1421. You think, with this exception, that any other system than that of promoting colonels by the seniority of a brevet to be general officers would be liable to great objections?—I think it would. 1422. You are aware that in the French service the system of selection principally begins where ours ends, namely, with the senior officers, and that promotion goes on in a great degree by seniority in the lower ranks, there being no system of purchase in the French Yes. army? 1423. Do you conceive that in a representative government like ours where, to a certain extent, political influence must prevail, it would be detrimental to the cordial feeling which at present exists amongst the officers of the army, if officers were promoted by the Commanderin-chief, not for distinguished service, but selected for some supposed merits, to brevet fieldofficers and even major-generals?—I should think it objectionable, and I think it would be very detrimental. 1424. Practically you are an instance that, when the government want to employ an officer in a higher command than his rank usually confers, they can do it; for instance, you were only a major-general when employed as a lieutenant-general commanding the forces in Ireland?-I was. 1425. And local rank in our colonies can, when the emergency arises, equally be given according to the custom of the service?—It can. 1426. And also in the field?—Yes. 1427. The principle of the service is rise by seniority from the rank of lieutenant-colonel? -Yes. 1428. Up to the rank of lieutenant-colonel it is a system of selection?—Yes. 1429. But it has always been, at least as far as we can recollect it, a system of rise by seniority from the rank of lieutenant-colonel, with the only exception of promotion made by the sovereign of his aides-de-camp?—Yes. 1430. Would it not be deemed a departure from the usual practice of the service, and from the system of rise by seniority from the rank of lieutenant-colonel, if the Commander-in-chief was to promote lieutenant-colonels to be colonels?-I think it would be a decided departure from the system of the service. 1431. Do you not conceive that by the existing system the choice of the Commander-in-chief of officers for commands is considerably restricted?-I do not think it is; there is a large list of different ranks. There are a great number of officers of great experience. 1432. During peace, officers have generally attained a very considerable age before they arrive at the rank of major-general?—They have. 1433. Supposing it to be necessary for any particular service to appoint some younger men to be major-generals, according to the existing system, it would be necessary by a general brevet to promote to that rank a large number of persons, many of whom would be unfit for the duties of the situation?—Yes. 1434. Do not you conceive that that is a system liable to considerable objection ?—It depends upon what your object is. If you fix upon a particular portion for the senior rank, you must have a great confidence in them, or it must be a partiality on the part of the person selecting. Examinations. Lieut.-General the Right Hon. Sir E. 1435. Under the existing system, in order to obtain the services of five or six efficient major-generals, it is probably necessary to promote to the rank of major-general 50 or 60 Commander of the persons who are not efficient for their duties, from age, from ill health, and from various circumstances?-I think that is a liability that the army is exposed to during peace, when promotion has been very slow. 1436. It entails a very considerable burden upon the public?-It does; but, then, what I would wish is a retired list between the rank of colonel and general. 1437. Under the existing system of necessity the Commander-in-chief fills up the colonelcies of regiments by selection?-He recommends, I believe. 1348. Those colonelcies are not filled up by any regard to seniority, but by selection, according to what are supposed to be the merits and claims from past service of different general officers?-Certainly. 1439. Without regard to seniority?-I think the Commander-in-chief exercises his judgment very frequently with regard to seniority in some instances. 1440. In the same manner, by selection, all vacant commands are filled up?-They are. 1441. Do you conceive it to be impossible that any system should be established by which general officers should be appointed by selection to commands from the whole class of colonels and lieutenant-colonels, when wanted?-I should be afraid of its creating great dissension and disappointment, and that they would be plagued to death by officers making representations, and it would take time to know whether the choice would be incorrect or not; it would depend upon the opinion of the Commander-in-chief of that particular person. 1442. Assuming the system to be this, that commands were only held by major-generals up from for a definite period, and that when a vacancy took place in a command it was filled the list of colonels and lieutenant-colonels, would that create greater discontent among those passed over in that list than it now creates in the list of major-generals when one particular person is selected for a command ?-I fear it would, because we have so few opportunities of providing for general officers on the staff that they are most of them looking forward to get situations by which they could be employed. There is no possibility of retirement; every man thinks he is capable of serving. 1443. You would object to any system by which the rank of major-general should be permanently obtained by a person doing the duty as a colonel for a certain definite period ?— Yes, I think a major-general should be a major-general, that he should not be a colonel made a major-general for that particular duty. I believe there have been instances in which colonels have been appointed brigadier-generals. 1444. Practically, is not the difficulty referred to got over by selection at this moment, and at all times when you enter upon a campaign?—Yes. 1445. Are not colonels appointed brigadier-generals ?—Yes. 1446. Are not general officers selected from those supposed to be the most efficient for the service when colonels are appointed brigadier-generals?-Yes, they get the rank of brigadiergeneral only to serve in a particular part of the world. 1447. So that any inconvenience which may be supposed to arise from officers being promoted by seniority is got over by making that selection?—Yes. 1448. You consider the British service, in which more than half the officers of the army on other service full-pay are employed in the colonies abroad, to be much more severe than any in Europe, owing to the fact that other countries have few or no colonies?-Decidedly. Our army is exposed to much more extensive service than any other army in Europe. 1449. Many old officers, by adhering to their regiments for several years in unhealthy climates, may be obliged to retire from ill health, or other causes, with the rank of lieutenantcolonel, having efficiently and ably served the public for 30 or 40 years-do you conceive it would be just to those officers having a pride in their profession, and having spent their best years in the service, to exclude them from the rank of major-general upon the occasion of a brevet, and to stop their future prospects of reward when no longer able to go on with the active duties of the profession, in a great degree owing to severe colonial service already performed?-The rank of general has a responsibility that requires youth and everything else as much as you can secure it, and therefore I conceive that an officer having arrived at a certain age, and having served in the colonies, where his health has been very much affected, can be of no use as a general officer; and, if you gave him the rank of colonel and an honorary badge, I dare say he would be satisfied. 1450. Do not you think that, after that description of service, he has acquired a claim to the rank of major-general?—He may have a claim to the rank, but the country would not benefit by his services; and then you load the list of general officers, and it is said you have 500 or 600 general officers, and they have no army to command, and people do not under stand that it is a retirement almost. 1451. Your answer is given as meeting a prejudice which may pervade a part of the public, but the question refers to the justice due to old officers in the army, whether it would be just after those officers have spent their lives in the severest service in the world, even in time of peace, to stop them when they are about to obtain the rank of major-general, because they are no longer able to perform active service?-Yes; but that is taking up the case at the moment the officer is to be made a major-general. I take it up long before that period, when he is a lieutenant-colonel with his regiment. I want to give him the rank of colonel and an honorary badge, and a certain pay, and stop him from being a general officer. I want to induce him to accept of that. M 2 Forces in Ireland. 24th July, 1838. Examinations. Lieut-General the 1452. The question had not reference to the mode of inducing officers to leave the service for the sake of making vacancies, but it had reference to the justice of the general system of brevet promotion, whether it would be just after officers had served in the field and in bad climates for 30 or 40 years, and were about to obtain the rank of major-general upon the ancient system of brevet, for the mere purpose of keeping down the list of general officers, the difference of expense to the public not being great between the two modes, whether, under all these circumstances, you would stop the brevet promotion, as at present carried on, for the sake of adopting any other system?-I should prefer that the retired list was fixed to colonels. 1453. How would you make new major-generals ?--You come to the general list again. After you have made an opening of a certain number of officers in the highest part of the lieutenant-colonels' list, you then get at a younger class of officers. 1454. You still go on promoting by seniority, after taking out this certain number of colonels, whom you lay aside by providing for them the same pay that they would have as major-generals, £400 a-year?-Yes. 1455-6. Then you still would have to select for the service of the regiments, and for the rewards of the service from this new class?—Yes. 1457. Would there be any such great advantage from this system as would justify the laying aside of so many old officers who had served 30 or 40 years in bad climates?—I am looking forward to the efficiency of the general officers, and I want the rewards to stop at the colonels. 1458. The general officers are now selected for service abroad in the army, wherever it may be, from the whole list of general officers and colonels of the army, because, if they are wanted, the colonels of the army may be taken and employed upon service abroad?—Yes, 1459. Would any advantage be derived from taking out a certain number from that class and laying them aside? Would it be worth the expense, which you calculate to be £100,000 a-year?—If the list of generals were by that means reduced to about 250 or 300, then you would not have to provide for the generals you now have, and you would have 100 colonels to provide for with the present promotion for major-general; and then an officer, seeing that he was likely to stop at colonel, would either sell his commission or take the advantage of retirement as a full colonel. 1460. Are you proposing the system as a system to be adopted for one turn, and then to be laid aside, or do you mean it as a permanent system to be adopted in the army?—I should say a permanent system, and that the system should be to adhere to the exact number of general officers, whatever number is fixed. The number I thought of was about 300. 1461. Is it possible that there ever could be a necessity with the British army for the employment of 300 major-generals?-Certainly not. 1462. Theu, why have 300?-I mentioned that because we have got such a large number now, and we want in the first instance to make the reduction. 1463. Would it be desirable, in your opinion, to bring them down to the exact number that could be employed?-It is difficult to say. 1464. Supposing they were brought down to the exact number that could be employed, would not you still have to make a selection from the senior colonels, or lieutenant-colonels in the army?-Certainly, I am satisfied of the great difficulty there is in the whole question; but still I think that in the position the senior officers are in now, it would be a great deal to do something that would improve the system. 1465. Would there not be the same difficulties under those circumstances that there are now in making a selection; would not the only difference be, that instead of having three or four or five hundred major-generals, you would have the same number of colonels placed upon pensions and retired allowances of £400 and £300 a-year, and the rest of the army would be in the situation of commanding officers of regiments to pass through this rank of colonel, and then to be major-generals ?—Yes, it comes to the same thing. 1466. Would the advantage to be derived from the system be other than that of stopping the clamour upon the subject of the number of major-generals there are in proportion to the size of the army, and the means of employment for them?-It would lessen it a little; but I do not suppose it would do it away entirely. 1467. By the present system, when once an officer obtains the rank of lieutenant-colonel, the consideration of whether he is a wealthy man, or whether he is a man of interest with the government of the day, or any other consideration, ceases to operate; he is sure of rising to the rank of major-general, if his health is good and his conduct good?—Yes. 1468. You say that the advantage you would propose from selecting officers to become major-generals and placing old officers of the rank of colonel upon the shelf, would be that you would have younger major-generals for service?—I should hope so. 1469. When you came to select for regiments, how would you deal with the old colonels? You have placed aside men who had passed their lives and sacrificed their health, perhaps after 30 or 40 years service in our colonies?-Then I would consider that they had voluntarily accepted of those retirements, having got the honorary badge and the annuity. 1470. Then you make the retirement voluntary?-Voluntary. My feeling about an officer of old standing is, that he does not like to go out a fourth or fifth time to the colonies, and therefore he would accept the rank of colonel for his life and would not look forward to be a general officer. 1471. Supposing an old officer so worn out would not accept the temptation you offer, would you still allow him to become a major-general in his turn ?-The custom of the servive sometimes now is, that an officer who is inefficient for doing the active duties of the service, gets a letter to be permitted to sell. 1472. Supposing this officer has got to the rank of colonel before he has become in that state as to be sent away, but still is so old that you think he ought not to be made a majorgeneral, if he was obstinate and thought he could do his duty, you would not force him out? I think I should. 1473. How would you decide upon a man's being unfit? What Board or what officer should have the decision of it?-I would not take a step of that kind, unless the man was so infirm that he was not equal to the active duties of a regimental officer. 1474. To whom would you leave it to decide that?-To the Commander-in-chief, upon the report of a medical board. 1475. Is there not a power now of having a medical board upon officers ?—Yes. 1476. Therefore that would be no alteration from what now exists?-No. 1477. You are aware that it has frequently been a subject of discussion whether the Guards ought to have the advantage of the increased rank which they now possess. What is your opinion upon that subject ?—I think, as they are the Queen's household troops, I have never heard the army complain of it. 1478. Do not the larger proportion of officers who rise to the rank of major-general acquire their rank in the Guards, and not in the corps which are subject to all the vicissitudes of colonial service?--I should say, certainly, that a difference is felt, that is to say, the Guards are considered to be favoured as compared with the line, in consequence of one being at home getting rank, and the other being abroad and not getting it; but I do not think the line ever think of complaining of it, as they consider the Guards a body of honorary troops about Her Majesty. I have never heard it complained of. 1479. There is no wish among the officers of the line that commissions in the Guards should be given away as a reward for good service in the line, or that any other system should be adopted?-We have always been very distinct, the Guards and ourselves. I have never heard it mentioned; I never heard of officers being jealous or complaining of it. 1480. Is not it the fact, that exchanges between officers of the line and officers of the Guards are going on constantly?-Constantly. 1481. And this advanced promotion of the officers of the Guards is, in fact, enjoyed in that way by the line?—It is. 1482. Was not it the case at the end of the last war, that when there was a promotion in the Guards, a considerable number of the commissions of that promotion were given to officers. of the line who had served with the army abroad?—Yes, a large number. 1483. Sir Henry Hardinge was one?—Yes. 1484. With regard to the relative proportions of the Guards and of the line, are you aware that the number of the battalions of the Guards at present is exactly the same as it was in, Charles the Second's time, whilst the line has been augmented to be about two-thirds stronger. now than it was at that time ?-I am not aware of that. 1485. Supposing that to be the case, any disproportion that formerly existed is rendered mnch less now?-Yes. Examinations. Lieut.-General the Captain John Fry, of the Rifle Brigade, examined. services and the 1486. How long have you been in the service?—I am now in my 29th year. 1487. Have the goodness to state to the Commissioners the nature of your time you were employed in the course of those services, abroad and at home?—I served in three campaigns in Portugal, Spain, and France, and also in the campaign of Waterloo. I have served also in America, from which I returned about a year and a half ago with my. regiment. 1488. Will you state the manner in which your promotion has been obtained, whether by purchase or without purchase?—I purchased my first commission; the other commissions I obtained without purchase. 1489. Will you state whether it was for any distinguished conduct in the field or elsewhere? -No. As I am called upon for a statement of my services, I may mention that I have been twice wounded. 1490. Did you get your promotion for that?—No. 1491. Will you state, to the best of your recollection and belief, the expenses to which you have been unavoidably liable, from your frequent removals from one station to another, and from the necessary change of quarters from time to time?-It would require some time to calculate that exactly. At a rough guess, however, I should say it was not far short of £100 or £150; but I can tell the Commissioners of one serious expense to which I have been exposed. When I was ordered out to America, it was at a season of the year when there were no ships to that part of it, namely, Halifax, where my regiment was stationed, and I was told at the Admiralty that a passage could not, therefore, be found me. I then offered to find my own passage, receiving the usual allowance, and intended to go by Liverpool. Hearing, however, accidentally of a ship being on the point of sailing for Halifax, I took my passage in her, and put my baggage on board at Gravesend, the master of the vessel having agreed to call for me at Dover. I went down to that place, accordingly, and waited for him; but he passed without calling. The consequence was, that I was obliged to go by the United States, and in that way was put to an expense of nearly £100. I had to pay the master £8 or £9 for the carriage of my baggage; for, relying on his engagement to call for me at Dover, I put it on board, as I Captain J. Fry, |