Party nature. In 1875 and 1879, during | fore the Militia Committee presided over the reign of a Conservative Government, by the late Secretary of State for War, he had brought forward Motions on at the time of his holding the Office military matters in a similar manner, of Financial Secretary. The Commitsolely in the interests of the Army and tee was specially appointed to inquire of the country. Four days after he gave into " certain questions that had arisen Notice of the present Motion, there ap- with respect to the Militia and the peared in the newspapers an epitome of present brigade depôt system in conthe General Order of the War Office to nection with it;" and it was important carry out the scheme of Army Re-organi- to bear this fact in mind, on account of zation, embracing the establishment of Mr. Childers now attributing the initia the territorial system. He had found tion of the proposed system of "terriamong several friends of his own extra- torial" regiments to Colonel Stanley, ordinary ignorance as to the meaning his Predecessor at the War Office. Mr. of these territorial arrangements; and Knox began by saying that, in March he should, therefore, venture to give 1869, in introducing the Army Esti some explanation of the matter. It mates, Mr. Cardwell said he had a strong was 10 years since Lord Cardwell, as disposition to favour a system of shorter Secretary of State, started the scheme enlistments. In the end of the same of pairs of battalions, whether double year great pressure had been put upon or linked. The basis of the scheme was the Indian Government by the Home that there should be one battalion at Government to reduce public expendihome to be the feeder of its twin bat- ture, and in consequence the Indian talion abroad, and this arrangement had Government had offered to send home continued down to the present time. At seven Infantry and four Cavalry regithe same time, it had been thought de- ments. Ultimately, after much discussirable to establish a local connection sion at home, it was decided to reduce between the Militia regiments in the the number of companies as well as of district in which these pairs of battalions battalions in India; and the result was of Regulars were supposed to be local- that there were to be 50 regiments of ized; two Militia battalions were affiliated Infantry alone in India, instead of 52, to two battalions of the Line, making and eight companies in each, instead the third and fourth battalions of the of 10. At the same time, it was debrigade, or, as it was now to be termed, termined to withdraw a certain numthe "territorial" regiment. That ber of battalions from the Colonies, the change was simply nominal, except result being that whereas in 1869, 46 in regard to the change of uniform battalions only were at home, in the and the change of title. As the General following year the number at home was Order came out on the 11th of April, it increased to 68, and of course there was might be thought that his Motion was a corresponding decrease in India and a day after the fair, but that was not a the Colonies. In the same year the fair way of looking at it; indeed, he re- short-service system was introduced, gretted that it would be a part of his with which, however, his Motion had duty that night to show that the Secre- nothing to do. In 1871, Mr. Cardwell tary of State for War was open to the explained why he abolished depôt batcharge of unfair dealing in the matter- talions. But this Mr. Knox explained first of all on account of the way in in his evidence was the real commencewhich he had treated the Report of the ment of the twin-or double and linkedCommittee presided over by the noble and battalion system, which, he said, was gallant Lord on his right (Lord Airey); the forerunner, and not the sequitur, of and, secondly, in having stated that this the brigade depôt system; and he conproposed re-organization was simply tinued to describe it thuswhat was proposed by his Predecessor in Office. To appreciate the position in which the question stood, it was necessary to trace it chronologically from its origin; and this could be done most conveniently by giving an epitome of the evidence of Mr. R. A. Knox, Estimate Clerk at the War Office, be The Earl of Galloway Government in 1870, to effect the reductions in "In the plan that was proposed to the Indian their military expenditure, the plan of linking the battalions of the Service where the regiments did not consist of two battalions was fully drawn out, and I will just read briefly what the plan was. ciple attempted to be carried out in the following This was in February, 1870- The prin scheme is (1) that the Infantry shall be com talion of four companies, which you can mak into a third battalion or a depôt.' Mr. Cardwell, in 1872, explained in the House of Commons that in consequence of further withdrawals from the Colonies and abroad the number at home was 71, and abroad 70 of the 141 battalions of Infantry of the Line;' adding, 'it is intended that of two Line battalions united in one brigade, one shall always be abroad and one always at home. The two Militia regiments will be associated with them in the same brigade.' He (Mr. Cardwell) continued-That the permanent staff of the two Militia regiments will be associated with the local depôt, and when present interests cease, the new permanent staff was to be appointed from the battalion which constitutes the depôt. Army Reserve men and Pensioners in each district were to be attached to the depot centre for payment, training, &c. Infantry Militia battalions to be placed under canvas at their respective depôt centres. Line and Militia recruits were to be sent direct to brigade depóts for their recruit training.' Adding— The object sought to be attained by this arrangement is that the battalion at home may serve as a feeder for the supply of casualties in the twin battalion of the same district serving abroad.' After further questions and answers, A. 22, page 5, Mr. Knox says-The plan which was in the mind of the Secretary of State in 1871-2 did not include brigade depôts at all; it simply included an idea of dividing the country into large sub-districts commanded by a colonel on the Staff to superintend recruiting and inspect the Auxiliary Forces. posed of regiments, each consisting of two battalions, within which service shall be interchangeable for both officers and men; (2) that the normal distribution of those regiments shall be one battalion at home, and one abroad, which would take their tours of foreign service alternately; (3) [this was one of the advantages pointed out of the scheme, says Mr. Knox] that the cadre of the home battalion be so organized as to admit of a second battalion being detached for service, and yet a strong cadre left at home for depôt purposes. The plan in its perfection can be at once worked in all regiments possessing two battalions, one of which is at home and the other abroad. As regards the other battalions, if it may be assumed that before long the number of battalions serving at home and abroad will be equal, one battalion at home could be permanently attached to a battalion abroad as its reserve and depôt, and to alternate with it in its tour of foreign service.' Mr. Knox addsUnder this arrangement eight companies of the two-battalion regiments would be on foreign service, and 12 companies on home service.' This was in 1870, before the Memorandum of His Royal Highness or the Report of General Macdougall's Committee. In order to start this twobattalion system, a plan was started in the Short Service Act of 1870, which (he says) may be described almost as general service for the enlistment of men.' In 1871 Mr. Cardwell explained why he had abolished depôt battalions (in language, as it seemed to him (Lord Galloway), but too curiously applicable in every detail to his own subsequent invention of brigade dopôts) in these words-That system was costly, it was inefficient, it removed the officers from direct subordination to their commanding officers, and placed them under the commanding officers of the depot battalions. Now it is proposed to establish training centres for the Regular troops and the Militia upon the local principle.' He then explained a proposal to appoint colonels to command large bodies of from 15,000 to 20,000 men. The permanent staff of Militia and Volunteers were to be utilized by these colonels, who were to be colonels commanding of Militia, when the latter were not out for training. Militia and Regular recruits were to be trained together. Militia recruits to have longer training. Billeting of Militia at this time also was objected to. More Regular battalions at home entailed a necessity for more barracks. It was considered, therefore, a convenience was thus afforded to carry out what was wished, of establishing a more intimate connection between the two Forces; and thus,' said Mr Cardwell, follows the principle laid down by Mr. Pitt in 1803, that all the instruction of the Militia Forces should be given by the Army.' So far up to 1871 (inclusive), the principle of short service and localization was determined on-that is, identifying with each locality the recruiting and training of Regular, Reserve, and Auxiliary Forces. In 1872, the mode of carrying it out was explained definitely by Mr. Cardwell, and at the same time the brigade depot system intro-was all started in 1873. In two years duced. The chief points were thus notified Association of two battalions of Regulars, and two of Militia; the two battalions of Regulars having 20 companies, giving technical strength of one battalion of eight companies for foreign Bervice, the same for home service, and one bat In 1870, estimates provided for 17 colonels reduced to 30 On page 8, in reply to Questions 66-8, by Sir Garnet Wolseley asking whether the intention had not been to amalgamate eventually the linked regiments, and designate them as one corps, and whether The Army List was not changed with that view in its form, Mr. Knox admitted all this, but said it was found inconvenient for reference, and was therefore changed back again. Thus, up to 1872 (inclusive), had been formulated a system embracing (1) twin battalions; (2) short service enlistment; (3) brigade depôts." Short service was not part of to-night's question. The twin battalion, whether double or linked, was the one and same principle-requiring one battalion always abroad, the other always at home. Brigade depôts may be shortly described as the localization principle, to be carried out by a fusion of the training machinery, and, in consequence, destroying the single battalion (whether Regulars or Militia) as "the tactical unit." This the Militia found it was suffering from the effects of the new organization, and set up a howl of lamentation which resulted in the appointment of a Committee which reported in November, 1876. was most important to bear in mind in arguing the merits of this question, for it was too apt to be lost sight of. This time, in 1878, indeed, was the first opportunity of testing the new system. But what happened? Two years ago there were two small wars on our hands, the Zulu War and the Afghan War; but in both cases there was a universal outcry against the wretched state in which our bat talions had to be sent out. There were innumerable Returns called for on the subject; and, as their Lordships must remember, on both sides of both Houses the subject was continually brought forward. He himself, among others, brought the subject under their Lord ships' notice; and his special argument was that the breakdown was far more attributable to the twin battalion, with its sequitur the brigade depôt system, than to the short service system. After he had spoken, the Duke of Buccleuch ac quiesced in his remarks, upon Lord Cardwell got up and said he was surprised at the noble Duke's acquiescence, because he was one of those who signed the Report. The noble Duke said it was perfectly true he had signed the Report Here he wished to point out that Colonel Stanley, then Financial Secretary at the War Office, and Chairman of this Committee, prefaced a question which he put to Mr. Knox by a remark which showed that the whole object of the appointment of the Committee was to inquire into the evils from which the Militia was suffering. He said-"This question of the brigade depôt is only referred to us as far as the Militia is concerned." The two chief points which the Committee of which Colonel Stanley was the Chairman recommended were-first, that the Militia battalion should have returned to it its Adjutant, Quartermaster, and permanent Staff, in order to have it restored as a tactical unit; and, secondly -he was quite prepared to admit this much-that the double or twin battalion system having been established, as far as the Infantry of the Line was concerned, the two Militia battalions of the district should become the third and fourth battalions in direct association with them, thus forming in each district a regiment composed of two battalions of the Line and two of the Militia. But the Committee further said that where both battalions of the Line were abroad at the same time the normal establishment of 100 men at the depôt should be expanded to 600, and that, if necessary, one Militia battalion or more should be embodied. It should also be remembered that that Committee was empowered to report only as to improvements in detail on the system established, not to recommend its reversal. The Report was made in November, 1876; and in 1877 the noble Viscount (Viscount Cranbrook), then Secretary of State for War, acted on the advice of the Committee as to restoring each Militia battalion as a tactical unit by giving it back its Staff. The recommendation about the "territorial" regiments came to nothing; and it might, therefore, be fairly argued that the proposition could not have found favour with Viscount Cranbrook. In the spring of 1878 Colonel Stanley became Secretary of State for War; but he did not attempt to introduce "territorial" regiHe wished their Lordships to bear in mind that Mr. Cardwell, when Secretary of State for War, always urged that the sole object of the new system ments. which the "But the result of his experience since 1876 had disappointed his expectation that the new system would prove a success.' Lord Limerick, who also sat on the Committee of 1876, said on the same occasion it was true that he also had signed the Report; "but if the ques tion had been an open one"-in other words, if they had had to report on advisability of the system itself "the result would have been different." The real fact-as told him by Members of the Committee-was that there was so much recommended in the Report that was good that no one liked to decline to sign it. But there was a further fact, which was that though the "territorial" system was recommended by the Com mittee, anyone who read the evidence would find that Sir Garnet Wolseley was the person who was really anxious for that system. Sir Garnet Wolseley had at that time carried out the Red River Expedition - a bloodless campaign with great credit to himself; he had afterwards marched to Coomassie through a mass of jungle, in very difficult cir cumstances, fighting his way up to was to insure that the country should that city with yet greater credit to always be prepared for war; and this it himself, having rightly estimated exThe Earl of Galloway he ed to ritorial Tile 525 t important to the new system wars on our hand ed state in li to be sent out Returns called as their L both sides of was contin himself, ubject unders and his spe reakdown the twin bat rigade depr ice system ke of Ba remarks and s tap was one of e he had s Army Organization (MAY 16, 1881) Territorial Titles of Regiments. 526 actly the number of days it would the Report still remained in the hands of take. He was thus, at this particular the Government, in spite of the constant moment, at the zenith of his fame, and it remonstrances of political friends and was only natural that his opinion at the foes in Parliament. On November 1 The time should be taken in preference to any Times published the first of a series of other. Anyone who went through the articles on Army Reform, which bore evidence would see that the Report, as re- evident marks of inspiration, and this garded the "territorial" system, was his continued at intervals until the tardy child alone. His reason for dealing fully production of the Report early in last with that part of the subject was that on March. He did not blame a journal the 3rd of March last the Secretary of for anxiously endeavouring to be well State for War having at length been informed; but it was extraordinary, to induced to promise the production of the say the least of it, that the Report Report of the Army Organization Com- should have been so long withheld from mittee on the following morning, had Parliament after it had been practically announced that his Predecessor's Com- communicated to The Times, and even mittee in 1876 had recommended the after the production of the Report their complete fusion of the four battalions- Lordships had further just reason to two of the Line and two of the Militiacomplain. Notice was given in that into one territorial regiment; and he was, House that attention would be called to therefore, now anxious to point out that, the Report by Lord Abinger on the 20th although attributed to Colonel Stanley, March, scarce a fortnight after its producas Chairman, the scheme was in reality tion; but the debate was postponed for that of Sir Garnet Wolseley. It might a fortnight at the special request of the be, naturally, further asked why the Duke of Argyll, at that time a Cabinet changes recommended in 1876 had not Minister, as his Grace suggested, "for been carried into effect up to this time, the convenience of the Government." if Colonel Stanley was so anxious to act The discussion was therefore fixed for upon his own supposed recommendation. April 4; but before that day arrived But too much stress, it must be admitted, was issued, bearing date the 1st of should not be laid on his not having April, Mr. Childers's re-organization adopted it during the time he was Secre- scheme. That was treatment of which tary of State for War, for he found on his both the Committee and the Members hands, in 1878 and 1879, the Afghan of both Houses had a just right to comand Zulu Wars. Shortly after the late Se- plain. The Secretary of State for War cretary of State for War came into Office had in some cases accepted the recomthere were constant complaints of the mendations of the Committee in a modiunprepared condition of our Forces; fied form. In adverting, however, to the and Colonel Stanley evidently doubted proposal for abolishing the system of whether the establishment of territorial linked battalions, the right hon. Gentleregiments was likely to prove the true man said— remedy for that unfortunatestate of things. He, on the contrary, appointed a Committee, as strong a Committee as could possibly have been chosen, to inquire into the subject. It was worth while to notice the treatment received, not only by that Committee, but also by Parliament, at the hands of the present Government. The Blue Book in which this Report was published contained great quantities of important evidence, and the Report itself displayed the deepest and most copious knowledge of military matters. That Report was received by Colonel Stanley during the last few days of his tenure of Office; then came in March, 1880, the Dissolution of Parliament, and, though Parliament re-assembled in April and sat on into the second week in September, his experies pectation t o also st aid on thes that be but if none dog tem "I must refer to this part of their Report with some qualification; because, however constituted the Committee, their opinion on eminent may have been the gentlemen who this question was not sought in the official reference to them. On the contrary, they were told that there was no intention on the part of the Government to depart from the general principles of re-organization which had been accepted by the country since 1870." " This was not a pleasant way of alluding to what a Committee of distinguished Officers evidently considered to be the most important part of their Report. Mr. Childers went on to remark— "I find, however, that at the last moment, when five-sixths of the Evidence had been taken, and when the Committee were on the unofficial form, of which there is no record in eve of preparing their Report, a note, in an the War Office, was received by the Chairman weighted," making, however, this remarkable admission, that— of the Committee, saying that they were not "It is only in time of peace that the number of battalions at home can balance the number abroad;" and yet it was acknowledged that it was this basis upon which the system was Within the last three days he had been dependent for expansion in time of war. authorized by his noble and gallant that too much importance ought not to Their Lordships would see, therefore, Friend who presided over that Combe attached to the so-called want of mittee to say that on various occasions he went on various points for more direct Committee. He must now ask permisunanimity on the part of Lord Airey's authority to the Secretary of State for sion to quote several passages from the War, and that the right hon. Gentleman's special instructions were, that the Report of the Committee in support of his Report should be made as wide as pos-21, &c., on page 10 of the Report of the argument. On reference to paragraphs sible. It had been alleged that the note Committee, it would be seen that the oriwas an unofficial one; but his noble and gallant Friend would inform their Lord-ginal scheme-that was, Lord Cardwell's ships that he not only received a verbal sanction from the Secretary of State to go into this question, but that, in order that there might be no mistake, a note was sent to him by the permanent Under Secretary corroborating that sanction. But if further proof be wanted on this subject, reference need only be made to Clause 14 and the following paragraph of the Instructions to the Committee, signed by the Secretary of State for War "Clause 14 (n.) Lastly, as being a matter closely connected with the above considerations, it would be well that the Committee should place on record their opinion whether the present organization of battalions and companies is, on the whole, the best for the purposes required for the English Army, both at home and abroad. "The Committee may further report upon any other question that may be raised, during the investigation, in connection with the above references, and they may call for any Papers or Returns which they may deem necessary. "War Office, "20th June, 1879. (Signed) FRED. STANLEY." In regard to the remark of Mr. Childers "that the Committee were not unanimous on this head," he might point out that this could only refer to Sir Patrick M'Dougall, who, having been Chairman of the Localization of Forces Committee, was bound to put a good face on the matter and to support the system of linked battalions. For Sir Patrick was the only dissentient to unlinking; and even he (whose opinions on Army Reorganization the noble Lord quoted at great length) admitted that the system of linked battalions had not worked well, though he excused its shortcomings on the ground that it had been "unfairly The Earl of Galloway -could never be carried out-namely, home, and one always abroad," on ac"that one battalion should always be at count of the distribution of battalions 1872 BATTALIONS. At Home. Abroad. "Defects of scheme as worked are that even in time of peace the demand for men to supply the battalions on foreign service cannot be met from the depôts, and recourse must be had to the linked battalions, which are thus deprived of their best men; the recruits being transferred, after few weeks at depôts, on to home battalions, and then on to others, unsettles their minds, their interest in obtaining good opinion of officers lessened, discipline and regimental esprit de corps both suffer-no knowledge of one another between men and officers must prove fatal. |