Author Topic: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment  (Read 47407 times)

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #60 on: June 28, 2017, 05:10:29 PM »

PLEASE NOTE
All of the information on this thread is taken from different sources most are copyright of groups or individuals, I have checked the use of sections on all the sites. I understand that if they are being used for non profit or non commercial use it is OK to put them on our site.
Please bear this in mind if you use any of the information on this thread.
Thank-you

If anything does infringe copyright let me know and I will gladly remove it.

I now have written permission to reproduce alot of the articles on this forum. The rest are covered by the statement above.

Neil (Timberman)




PART FOUR

VOLUNTEER EQUIPMENTS.

HC Deb 13 March 1890 vol 342 cc727-64 727


the safety of the country. I know no man against whom such a charge is so groundless as my right hon.

Friend (Mr. Stanhope) who has not hesitated to bring before the House what no previous Minister has ever done, namely, a loan for fortifications for coaling-stations and commercial ports, and a loan for barracks, besides considerable additions to the Estimates. In the county county with which I am connected the idea of a Volunteer Equipment Fund has been taken up with the greatest interest and liberality. I believe there is every prospect in that county that the money necessary will be subscribed. I know that a similar result is going on in other counties, and I hope that my hon. and gallant Friend, and those who think with him, seeing the great progress which is going on, will not check it by pressing the Resolution now before the House. Reference has been made to the circular issued by the Adjutant General. There is no intention to press hardly on any corps. The utmost consideration will be given to all the circumstances in the case of a corps which, when the time comes, may not find itself in possession of a full equipment. There is no intention whatever of using this circular with the view of decreasing the Volunteer Force, or in any way putting difficulties in the way of a corps, otherwise efficient, which may find itself, owing to the circumstances of the past, in financial difficulty.' There are persons who support the authorities in thinking that the present capitation grant and allowances may be made equal to the present seeds. I am certain that no one who looks into the matter, and views all the facts surrounding the immense progress made in the last three years and the better position of Volunteer regiments, can have any ground of fear from the Government in regard to the circular. In these circumstances I ask my hon. Friend to consider whether it is necessary to give any stimulus to the Government either by the Resolution or by dividing the House.

 SIR H. HAVELOCK-ALLAN (Durham, S.E.)

Mr. Speaker, I think that Volunteers have every reason to be grateful to the Secretary of State for War for the great efforts which he has made in the past. I believe it is the general feeling that there never was a period when Volunteers were treated more generously than they have been by the present Secretary for War. We have heard all the great efforts which have been made to provide the Volunteers with a moveable artillery, and to provide a larger number of submarine miners and additional engineer companies, both steps in the right direction; but they do not in any way touch the present difficulties alluded to by my hon. and gallant Friend, and which I see no other means, whatsoever, of getting over.
 Either the Volunteer Force are liable to be called into operation for the defence of the country, or they are not. If they are, it is a necessity that they should be so equipped that they can fulfil the purpose for which as a force they were called into existence. As to our obtaining voluntary subscriptions. I have great reluctance to say anything that may check that movement. Of course it is a desirable thing that a movement in the direction of giving voluntary assistance should not be checked. But I think I am justified in saying that, with the exception of London, where the Lord Mayor had a large field, and perhaps Birmingham, there is no place where the example of those two vast centres is likely to be followed. In  Durham and Northumberland, where I have the honour to be in charge of a very large and excellent brigade of something like 6,000 men, it has been my duty within the last few months to endeavour to feel the pulse of this counties on the subject of obtaining assistance, and I am bound to say that I would be deceiving the public and inflicting injury on the Volunteer Force if I allowed the impression to prevail that voluntary subscriptions are likely to be obtained. On the contrary, these two counties of Durham and Northumberland, which are now in a state of exceptional prosperity, show a disinclination to give subscriptions, the reason which the leading men invariably give being that the opinion is becoming day by day more prevalent in the country that this is a matter which ought to be taken up by the Government, and by the Government alone. I do not go entirely with all the words of the Resolution. I think that a wise discrimination ought to be exercised in respect of the debts of corps.

 Many of the debts have been incurred in a way which will not bear examination, because of the imprudence with which they have been incurred. I do not suggest there has been malversation, but imprudence, and the greatest possible care, therefore, should be taken that the public purse is not called upon to pay debts other than those for equipments. With that exception I entirely agree with the Resolution. You may narrow the equipment down as much as you possibly can, but there is a limit beyond which you cannot go, for there are certain articles without which the bulk of Volunteers are not able to take the field—greatcoat, straps for carrying it, water-botttle, havresack, and another pouch. They cannot supply themselves in any way whatever except by an extra Government allowance. I have felt it necessary to make these remarks, though I have the greatest reluctance to do anything which would check the How of public subscriptions to provide equipments. But I am persuaded, from inquiries I have made not only in Northumberland and Durham but adjoining counties, that the extent to which voluntary sources are available is entirely exaggerated, illusory, and delusive. In the county of Durham, Lord Ripon has, for more than a year, been endeavouring to obtain the sum of  £1,200. He has only succeeded in obtaining £250, of which he subscribed £150 himself. I believe that is an indication of the extent to which aid may be obtained from private sources. The liberality of officers in assisting the maintenance of their corps is a source which cannot be further relied upon. I trust, therefore, that the Secretary of State for War will add to the other services which he has rendered the Volunteer Force by making strict inquiry sis to the articles which are absolutely necessary if or the Volunteer Force, and devising some means by which to supply them at the earliest possible period, if not by way of vote by way of loan, to be gradually paid off. I am perfectly certain by giving attention in this direction you will find the effort and cost more than counterbalanced by the increased efficiency which the Volunteers will exhibit.
 
 COLONEL BLUNDELL (Ince, S.W., Lancashire)

Sir, I concur in a great deal that has fallen from the hon. and gallant General. Though the Manchester regiments, with which I have the honour to be connected, are endeavouring to equip themselves, I am quite certain, taking the country as a whole, that there will be a great difficulty in obtaining the equipment of the Volunteers from private sources. Rightly or wrongly, there is a feeling that the Government should take up the work of properly equipping the Volunteers with all that is necessary. I would urge on the Secretary of State for War, while thanking him for what he has done in the past, that he should make these changes when the magazine rifle is issued to the Volunteers. The amount of the capitation grant should be then re-considered, arms, accoutrements, and equipments should be supplied, leaving the Volunteers to provide clothing only. The question of ranges is also one which it is absolutely necessary for the War Office to take into its special consideration, whether from the point of view of the safety of Her Majesty's subjects or the efficiency not only of the Volunteer, but of every other branch of the Service. For instance, at Manchester, a range is much needed, and I do think the Government should endeavour to provide ranges within an easy distance of all large centres of population.
 
 COLONEL CORNWALLIS WEST (Denbigh, W.)

I think the Volunteers of the country owe a deep debt of gratitude to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Birkenhead for the Motion which he has brought forward. The time has now arrived when the cases of, at any rate, the poorer corps should be taken into consideration. In my own county it has been found absolutely impossible to call public meetings to consider this question, because people will not attend; they say—and I confess that I think there is much force in it—that the Volunteers are a body recognised as a part of the military force of the country, and that so far as equipment is concerned the Government should see for it. But, on the other hand, the Volunteer officers are told that they must beg, borrow, or do what they can to obtain the necessary funds. For my own part, I have the strongest objection to any of these courses; I think it a degrading thing for officers to be obliged to get up bazaars, &c, in order to provide funds for the purchase of equipments which are essential to the force. I was very glad to hear from the Secretary for War that this circular is not to be pressed, because if it were, as far as many provincial corps are concerned, it would absolutely put an end to them. I hope and trust that the Government will take into consideration all the views which they have heard, and that they will find some means to assist the Volunteer Force in a greater degree than has yet been done—though I do not deny that much has been done—and that, so far as equipments are concerned, the Government will take the matter in hand.

 COLONEL E. S. HILL (Bristol, S.)

I wish to re-echo every word that has been said with regard to the consideration which has been shown to the. Volunteer Service by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War. Prior to 1886, many thousands of men passed through the regiment I had the honour of commanding for 26 years, and I do not think it right that the Financial Secretary should have described a force such as this as a mere hap-hazard collection of boys.

MR. BRODRICK

I did not say that. I said the Volunteer Force was, up to a certain date, a hap-hazard collection of units. The numbers of the different branches of the force had not been considered in connection with each other, and wherever companies or battalions of a particular arm of the force could be raised, such a formation was encouraged.

 COLONEL HILL

I am glad that I misunderstood the right hon. Gentleman. I entirely agree with the position in which the Volunteer force as described by my right hon. Friend the Member for West Birmingham, and the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Birkenhead. Either the Volunteers are a necessary portion of the defence of this country or they are not. If they are not they should be disbanded, but if they are, they should be supplied by the Government with everything they want for military service, and the Volunteers themselves should be asked simply to give their spare time. If the country wishes to have more than that, and to encroach upon the wage-earning time of the men, they ought to pay for it. I do not think it is right that a Volunteer should be put to any further expenditure of any sort. Notwithstanding what my hon. and gallant Friend has said with reference to the sufficiency of the capitation grant, I should ask leave to say that circumstances alter cases very materially, and it very much depends upon the position of a regiment whether or not its expenditure is heavy. I am very glad to hear him say that in his case they are able a have a little surplus, and, if he wishes to dispose of it, I should be happy to communicate to him the names of several corps by which that surplus could be advantageously expended. But as regards the question of equipment, I think it is unfair to ask Volunteers either to go about the country begging for subscriptions to provide military equipments for themselves, which seems to indicate a want of appreciation of their services on the part of the Government, or to ask officers to pledge their private credit at their bankers in order to provide the equipments. There is considerable difficulty in many regiments in obtaining the services of officers at the present moment, and if you put additional financial burdens upon the force that difficulty will be increased. I feel extremely grateful to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Birkenhead for having brought this matter forward, because he has, at any rate, elicited in regard to the circular a very satisfactory statement on the part of the Government. I trust he may see his way to rest satisfied with this statement and the discussion, and to withdraw his Amendment.

 THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. E. STANHOPE,) Lincolnshire, Horncastle

I hope I may be allowed to put it to the House whether this particular discussion should not come to a close. With regard to the Amendment, I think it is obviously impossible for the Government either to accept it or to say anything in encouragement of it. If I were to say a single word in support of it' it is obvious that not one further penny would be subscribed by the public, but all expenses would devolve on the Imperial Exchequer. It is undesirable, therefore, on behalf of the Volunteers themselves that the Motion should be pressed. I am obliged for the kind words which have been used about myself, and I am only sorry that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham has left the House, because I should have liked to address a special appeal to him. In Birmingham the number of Volunteers is utterly out of proportion to the population, and I think that the right hon. Gentleman in what he said as to the inability of the town to provide for the equipment of even this small body has pressed the matter beyond what was reasonable. Some hon. Members have stated, with great truth, that these articles were pressing and indispensable articles for Volunteers when they took the field. But they have been so for the last 30 years, and this formed no new argument in favour of taking the increase of the capitation grant again into consideration. I am strongly in favour of the principle of local

PART FIVE TO FOLLOW


© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman
« Last Edit: July 01, 2017, 09:48:07 PM by timberman »

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #61 on: June 28, 2017, 05:11:09 PM »
PART FIVE

VOLUNTEER EQUIPMENTS.

HC Deb 13 March 1890 vol 342 cc727-64 727


subscription. I sympathise with the undue pressure which is put upon officers of Volunteer corps, who I think are put in an exceedingly unfair position by being called on for subscriptions, and that is, in my opinion, one of the main reasons why it is difficult to get officers. But the effect of increasing the capitation grant would not be to spare the Volunteer officers; it would simply relieve their wealthy fellow townsmen of the payment of the subscriptions they have given  in the past. I think that there ought to be some local subscription in all cases, and that a Volunteer corps is much more valued in a locality if the locality itself has a pecuniary interest in it. No one will doubt that I highly value the Volunteer Force, and I assure the House that my desire in this matter is to increase and not in any way diminish the value and utility of the Volunteers. I will take care that no undue pressure is put upon thorn. Having made that statement, and looking to the fact that during my term of office the capitation grant have been increased by £160,000 a year, I think the House may rest satisfied that I did not desire in any way to injure the Volunteer force. I hope that the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Birkenhead will rest satisfied with the discussion that has taken place and allow us to pass on to the other Motions of great importance which we have to consider this evening.
 
 MR. C. S. PARKER (Perth)

As no Scotch Member has spoken in the course of this debate, I should like to say briefly that there is no class of expenditure more favourably viewed in Scotland than that which goes to support the Volunteers, and the Scotch Volunteers are very thankful to the right hon. Gentleman for the increased grant and the corresponding increase in efficiency which he has brought about. I well remember how different were the conditions when the force was first started. The aid then given by the Government was niggardly, very little regard was paid to efficiency, and Volunteers found scanty favour with the authorities at the War Office. Since then great advances have been made. But more is needed, and it is in vain at this time to look for much increase in local subscriptions. There are certain things which will always have to be provided by local subscriptions, such as the prize and band funds; but I think it a mistake to suppose that voluntary subscriptions could be largely increased. On the contrary, I believe they will remain very much as they are at present, and it will therefore be wise for the Government while insisting on efficiency to provide for anything necessary to secure it in the Estimates.

 SIR ALBERT ROLLIT (Islington, S.)

After the appeal made by the Secretary of State for War I have no wish to prolong the debate for more than a moment. I hope that the Amendment will be withdrawn. But I desire to impress upon the Government that there is a strong feeling in the country in favour of something more liberal being done for the Volunteers. In passing, I should like, as a member of the Mansion House Equipment Committee, to acknowledge the liberality with which the appeal for funds to provide equipments for the Metropolitan Volunteers has been responded to, but I am of opinion that there is not in the country generally a feeling in favour of securing equipments by these means. If the Volunteers are, as I hold them to be, an essential part of the forces of the country, it is the duty of the State to see that they are properly equipped. I desire to acknowledge the great interest taken by the Secretary of State for War in that branch of the force with which I have the honour to be connected—the submarine miners, who have a capitation grant of £5. I admit that in this particular branch there is exceptional need for the increased grant, but I confess it strikes me that the disproportion between that and the ordinary grant is more than the difference in the nature of the services warrants. I hope the Government will therefore take the grant to the mining engineers as a precedent and an example to be followed in the case of the other Volunteers.

 MR. TOMLINSON (Preston)

I think it must be admitted that every branch of the Volunteer Service owes much to the present Government for its increased efficiency. There are many cases of financial difficulty in the Volunteer Force, and in some corps the equipment will only be provided in time by increasing those difficulties. I would suggest that the Government should provide at least the water bottles and pouches of the Government pattern; otherwise there may be risk of unserviceable articles being introduced. The dread of financial responsibility, I believe, prevents suitable young men from accepting commissions. But the greatest difficulty the Volunteers have to contend with just now is the provision of ranges. My own corps has had its range closed in consequence of the increased danger  from the Martini-Henry rifle, and how the men will be able to complete their musketry instruction this year I do not know. We are at present dependent upon the courtesy of another corps at whose ranges we are able only to carry out a portion of the tiring. I do hope that during the discussion on the Army Estimates we shall have some statement of the views of the Government as to procuring ranges, and some indications that a little more assistance, not necessarily pecuniary, will be given to enable the force to obtain proper ranges.

 MR. P. A. MUNTZ (Warwickshire, Tarnworth)

I have never taken any active part in the Volunteer movement, but I have always entertained a strong opinion that the expenses of the Volunteers should be borne by the Imperial Exchequer. The right hon. Gentleman has made some observations with regard to the Volunteer Force in Birmingham. No doubt there is a great disproportion between the strength of the Volunteer Force there and the population of that great city, bat I should like to point out to the right hon. Gentleman that the people, and especially the Volunteers of Birmingham, hold strong views on this subject, and I have no doubt that if the present system were changed and the expenses borne by the Imperial Exchequer the force in Birmingham would be very largely increased. The people of Birmingham comprise a very hard-headed body of citizens, and their attitude towards the force will be very largely influenced by the course adopted by the Government on this matter.

 MR. de LISLE (Leicestershire, Mid.)

Before the Amendment is withdrawn I should like to say a word or two on the subject. I am certain that the policy embodied in the Motion is one very strongly approved in the country, but might I suggest a slight amendment. I would recommend the hon. and gallant Gentleman to insert in his Amendment the words, "Outside the City and County of London." London is the wealthiest part of the nation; large sums of money are contributed out of the National Fund for the maintenance of its Parks and Museums, and public buildings, and, therefore, I think it ought to be treated differently in this matter from the rest of the country. Speaking for the Volunteers of the neighbourhood which I have the honour to represent in this House, I would soy that the best way to secure their thorough efficiency would be to adopt the policy suggested by my hon. and gallant Friend. I may add that, through the patriotic exertions of the Mayor of Loughborough, funds have been raised to secure proper equipments for local corps.
 
 MR. S. D. WADDY (Lincolnshire, Brigg)

I wish to join with the hon. and gallant Member in pressing this Motion on the attention of the Government. I believe that no sufficient attention is at present paid to the great difference which exists with regard to the pecuniary resources of corps in different parts of the country, and, so far as I can see, the only remedy for it would be to place the force under a central authority. If the spirit which gave rise to the Volunteer Force is to be maintained, there must be such an equal distribution of their resources as we can only have through one hand. As to the merits of this Amendment, everybody seems to be agreed. It is only when the House of Commons speaks authoritatively that the Secretary of War is entitled to spend such amounts of money as I believe he is really yearning and almost burning with anxiety to expend at this moment. I hope the Amendment will be pressed to a Division.

 MR. GROTRIAN (Hull, E.)

This question of Volunteer grant is in itself a very important matter, and it is one which has engaged the serious attention of the country. If I understand rightly the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for War and the hon. Gentleman the Financial Secretary, I think they rather misapprehend the feeling of the country with regard to the subscription question. In the borough which I have the honour to represent a subscription has been got up which will provide the funds necessary for the equipment of the Volunteer forces in that borough, but many of the subscribers gave somewhat reluctantly. They felt they were doing that which it was actually incumbent on the Government to do, and they did it because their sense of patriotism rose superior to the sense of injustice which they thought they were suffering. I hope the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite (Mr. Waddy) rightly interprets the feeling  which permeates the mind of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for War, when he attributes to him a burning desire to make up the deficiency. After all, what is it that is asked for? Simply that the equipment absolutely necessary for the Volunteer Forces should be supplied by the Government. Well, I think it is the least which can be; reasonably asked. The right hon. Gentleman took credit, and rightly so, for the largo increase of money which, under his auspices, has been granted to the Volunteer Forces, namely, I believe £160,000. If the addition of the £160,000 to the grant is sufficient to provide so much I am afraid it will furnish a very strong argument later on for hon. Members to vote in favour of a reduction of the very large sum which the right hon. Gentleman is going to ask for later on. The main reason why I rose was to impress upon the right hon. Gentleman the importance, so far as possible, of conciliating the somewhat ruffled feelings of those who have conducted for many years the Volunteer organization under circumstances of very great difficulty and at enormous sacrifice, and of granting those who are less favoured than many situated in wealthy districts some additional assistance.

 COLONEL SAUNDERSON (Armagh, N.)

My right hon. Friend the Secretary for War appears to have objected to this proposal mainly on the ground that it would have the effect of damming up the tide of voluntary contributions towards the equipment of the Volunteers. I think, Sir, that the Government would encourage that generosity if they adopted the system of proportional grants. This is done, I believe, in other matters, and I believe that if my suggestion wore adopted instead of damming up the generosity of the public it would still further increase it.

MR. E. HARDCASTLE (Salford, N.)
 
I would urge my hon. and gallant Friend to press his Amendment to a Division. Within the last week or two a deputation from the part of the country I represent waited upon the right hon. Gentleman in reference to the circumstances affecting no less than 6,000 Volunteers. Their range, which they had occupied for several years, had  been taken from them for purposes of cultivation, and after very great labour the Volunteers succeeded in finding what they believed to be the only place in which they can have a satisfactory range. All they wanted the Government to do was to advance£12,000, upon the security of the grants they were earning, to enable them to purchase this range. It has been intimated to them, however, although we hear so much of the expected surplus, that the finances of the country are not equal to the grant of a loan of £12,000 for a great public purpose of this kind, although the security for that loan is the Government grant. I certainly hope the Amendment-will be pressed to a Division.

MR. SALT (Stafford)

If this Motion, is not to be pressed to a Division I think we ought to have a more definite expression of opinion from the Government. I have watched this discussion carefully, and I believe on both sides of-the House every man present is anxious to vote for the Motion. I will not ask my hon. and gallant Friend to divide because I do not wish to see the business of the House checked or interrupted: but I do not think that the assurance given by the Government is satisfactory. Not a single Member has spoken against the proposal. We are told that the Government approve of the principle which the whole House has condemned, namely, the raising, by means of subscriptions, of money which ought to be defrayed by the Government. Then we are told that a certain Order which has been issued will not be pressed. Nothing, to my mind, can be more unsatisfactory than to have it declared by the Government that an inconvenient Order which has been issued to the Volunteers throughout the country will not be pressed. If the recent Order cannot be enforced it ought to be at once withdrawn. What we all want to secure is that the Volunteer Force shall be really efficient in time of war. Whenever that force conies to be

PART SIX TO FOLLOW

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #62 on: June 28, 2017, 05:11:41 PM »
PART SIX

VOLUNTEER EQUIPMENTS.

HC Deb 13 March 1890 vol 342 cc727-64 727


used it will be on a sudden emergency, and probably it will be employed against some of the best troops in Europe. We ought to be assured by the Government that the force is fit for service, and, if it! is not, that they will either give it up altogether or make it fit for service.

MR. E. STANHOPE
 
Might I say  one word by the indulgence of the House? If my hon. Friend will allow us to get into Committee he will be able to hear the statement I intend to make about the Volunteer Force. I have told the House perfectly distinctly that I do not want to press anything unfairly against the Volunteers, and that I am perfectly prepared to make every allowance for the difficulty experienced in particular localities, and to do my utmost, as I have always done in the past, to increase their efficiency.
 
 SIR E. HAMLEY

I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.

COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)

I object to the withdrawal.

 The House divided:—Ayes 102; Noes 135.—(Div. List, No. 26.)

 Words added.
 
 Main Question, as amended, put. Resolved, "That it is expedient that, after a certain fixed date, all deficiencies of the equipments of Volunteers which are necessary to efficiency, and all debts of corps properly incurred on account of the same, be made good from the public revenues.

 MR. W. H. SMITH

I now move that the House immediately resolve itself into Committee of Supply.
 Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House will immediately resolve itself into the Committee of Supply."

(Mr. W. H. Smith).

 SIR G. CAMPBELL (Kirkcaldy)
 
I have a Motion on the Paper in the following terms:— That this House regrets that the efforts of Her Majesty's Government are mainly devoted to concentrating and improving the Regular Army as such, rather than to localising and popularising the Forces of the Crown for defensive purposes. The Government have resisted a Motion which only required that they should find the necessary equipment for Volunteers, and they have been defeated by the House. I take a somewhat broader view of the matter than the Mover of the last Amendment, and I think I am justified in submitting, at any rate in the form of remarks, the view I entertain. What has just occurred justifies my action in putting my Motion on the Paper, and shows that, in the opinion of the House, Her Majesty's Government are not sufficiently alive to the Auxiliary Forces, that they have hitherto too much taken the Regular Army point of view in considering the matter. This country nowadays cannot rely on its Fleet alone. Modern changes have put us much more n the position of Continental countries ihan we used to be, and with our enormous accumulation of wealth we are bound to take efficient means to repel aggression. The Government, however, whilst they are doing the best they can for the Regular Army, have neglected the Auxiliary Forces. They have refused to meet the just requirements of the Volunteers.

Then there is the Militia which has declined by no less than 15,000 men in a few years—the number being now only 103,000, whereas it was formerly 118,000. This, to me, is a matter for very serious regret. I am aware that Her Majesty's Government have appointed a Committee to inquire into the subject, but I cannot trace in the Estimates or the arrangements they are making with regard to barracks any indication that they have resolved to deal with the matter in a radical fashion. I find that almost all the fresh expenditure contemplated is devoted to the Regular Army. In the matter of barracks their proposal is to concentrate the Regular Forces of the Crown in great camps. I see nothing whatever proposed, for providing new barrack accommodation for the Auxiliary Forces, and having watched the matter with considerable interest, I must say that the arrangement made for territorialising the Forces of the Crown is not genuine.
The Line Battalion never serve in their territorial districts. It is really a sham. It is not complete National territorialising. You have a large surplus of officers in the Army. You say that in order to provide for a proper flow of promotion you must have officers retire in the prime of life, and you give them a considerable pension to retire, while at the same time you cannot get officers for your Militia. It seems to me there is great inconsistency in this, and that certainly officers who retire with considerable life pensions should be required to serve in the Auxiliary Forces. I recently read an article in a military paper in which this view was  taken, and I think it is a view that cannot be controverted. Not only the officers, but the men and the Reserve Forces should be made part and parcel of our Militia Force and should not be kept separate as a mere adjunct to the regular Army. I want to see a large proportion, if not the whole, of the population armed for the defence of the country. Same people are afraid that if we encourage volunteering we shall encourage a military and Jingo spirit. That is not my view. The experience of France and other countries shows that the more popular the Army is the less inclined the country is to engage in foreign expeditions and aggressions. France was formerly the most military and aggressive country in the world, but it is not so now. What has brought about the change? Nothing, I believe, but the system of universal service, for that system has brought home to the minds of the people the fact that if they must tight abroad they must fight themselves.

The French Parliament would not allow their troops to go to Egypt to commit the aggressions we have committed, and the occupation of Tonquin was the most unpopular

 MR. SPEAKER

The rule is that the remarks of the Mover of an Amendment must be relative to the Amendment. The hon. Gentleman is entering upon a very wide field.

 SIR G. CAMPBELL

My only suggestion is, that it is very desirable that we should have a popular Army, that a popular Army is not likely to be an aggressive Army. I think that if we increase our Auxiliary Forces, oven at some expense to the Regular Forces, we should reap considerable advantage. We should make this great country much more secure than it is, and repress the spirit of Jingoism, which prevails amongst certain portions of the community. I admit the popular feeling of the country is not ripe for compulsory military service; but, on the other hand, I think it is the duty of the Government and of the House to do all they can to encourage a popular force of the people for defensive purposes. I would contract the expenditure on the Army, in order to increase the expenditure on the Auxiliary Forces, to do that justice to the Volunteers which the House has demanded we should do, and to restore the  Militia to the efficiency from which it has fallen in recent years. Looking at the matter merely from the point of view of the efficiency of the Regular Army, concentration in the great centres where great barracks are to be erected by the Government is good; but it is on these grounds better that the Forces should be localised rather than concentrated.
 I should like to imitate, to some extent, that admirable country Switzerland. That is a small but an industrious and democratic country, and the people submit to be called upon to serve in the Army for the benefit of their country. I have seen barracks there built not for the Regular Army, but as centres for local recruiting and local popular military exercising. I think that we might localise our Army and induce the people in the different localities to take a pride in their local Auxiliary Forces. It may seem a far cry from the Army to the eight hours' movement; but I come from a country where miners abound, and I find that the miners there, instead of going in strongly for eight hours, go in for taking a holiday with the Militia in the summer time.

Then I think the Scotch fishermen might be made available for coast defence. I have received a paper to-day, in which it is stated by a Committee for the Defence of the Forth that the excellent materials on the east coast are not utilised as they might be for the defence of the country. No doubt the Admiralty do invite fishermen to join the second class of the Royal Naval Reserve; but the statistics which have been compiled show that Scotch fishermen are practically shut out, as the drill is unsuitable and interferes too much with their ordinary work. Therefore, there is ground for thinking that the Government have not given that attention and money for the development of our Auxiliary Forces which it is right and proper they should give. I admit we are not in the same position as a country like France. We are bound to keep up a Regular Army which shall retain possession of India and our other great colonies; but my belief is, while I am not in favour of a separate Army in India, that we might achieve the object the Government desire to obtain by a system of volunteering for long service instead of by an ordinary short service Army. There is another source from which I  think a good deal of money might be derived for making the Auxiliary Service more efficient. It seems to me that the colonies do not contribute in anything like a just proportion to the cost of the troops furnished for their protection.

The net cost of our Army is about £113 per head, not including the expense of sea transport. I find that 35,000 men are employed in the colonies and Egypt. The cost of those troops is given at £2,237,000, which amounts to just about £64 per head. It is perfectly clear that the troops employed abroad cost not less, but a great deal more than the troops at home, and, therefore, I should put down the real cost of these troops at £150 per head. Why do we not get more for these troops employed abroad? I am aware that in the present year the Government are making an effort to get more, but I want to know why the demands made on the colonies are so unequal. I find that India pays the whole cost of the troops employed there, and the Straits Settlements are called upon to pay £100,000, which is a good deal less than the real cost of the troops. Ceylon pays no more than it has paid for some time-namely, £34,500. Why should that be, and why should the prosperous colony of Natal, which has a largo revenue and surplus, pay only £4,000 a year? Why should the Cape Colony pay nothing at all? It seems to me that by making an alteration in this matter we might save a good deal of money which could be devoted to the Auxiliary Forces.

 DR. FARQUHARSON (Aberdeenshire, W.)

Now that the Motions on the Paper have been disposed of, I presume I shall be in order in making a few remarks on a different subject. My text will be the present condition of the Army Medical Department. I quite admit that it is a great deal more convenient to raise matters of this sort on the Vote relating to them, and I will not deal with any point of detail; but I think it well that the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. E. Stanhope) should know at this early stage of the proceedings the great dissatisfaction and disappointment which has been expressed not only in the Army Medical Department, but in the medical profession outside at the decision he has arrived at in regard to the recommendations of the Departmental Committee. I think the right hon. Gentleman has missed a very valuable and, perhaps, unique opportunity of settling these questions once and for all. If he had adopted the Report of the Committee he would have entirely settled all the dissatisfaction which has been seething around the Army Medical Department for years—dissatisfaction arising from the unsettled state in which medical officers have been left, and from the condition of perpetual change to which they are subjected. One reason why the right hon. Gentleman was unable to adopt the Report was the expense it would have involved. He has stated that that expense would be £100,000 a year. I should have thought that a heavy estimate; but, of course, I must admit that on a question of this sort he is better informed than I. I think it unfortunate that he could not have put an end to the perpetual changes in the duties of the Army Medical Officers, and that he has been unable to sec his way to make some return to the old regimental system with the destruction of which has disappeared so much of the domestic comfort, peace, and happiness of the Army Medical Officers. I think it also a pity that he could not have consented to proposals which would cost nothing. It is a common thing to say that doctors in these days do not want titles.

That is all very well for civilians, but in military life there are a great many questions such as that of the choice of quarters in which some kind of rank is absolutely necessary. The Army Medical Department, by a very largo majority, have said that they want some kind of compound title. I know that a few of the old military officers do not desire to have such a title, but they have had no experience of the rank-and-file life of the doctor of to-day, I do not know why the Government should be so much afraid of giving some kind of title to the doctor if he wants it —it cannot do them any harm, and it may do him some good. You have something of the kind in the title of surgeon general and surgeon major. I do not know why, when the medical officers want these titles, they cannot have them. Two or three countries have already adopted them—notably America—and I think that feeling in France is now tending-in that direction. In America the system works uncommonly well, and has placed the Army Medical Department on a firm and satisfactory basis. I am afraid there is still too much jealousy on the part of the combatant branch of the Service towards doctors. The hostility of the right hon. Gentleman's advisers to the Medical Department seems to be so great that I believe he has not ventured to place on the Table 'the evidence on which the Report of the Committee was based.

 MR. E. STANHOPE

I think it better that I should reserve my remarks until the hon. Gentleman raises the question in Committee. I may, however, just refer to one point. He says I have not put the evidence on the Table. Anyone can have the evidence, and I believe the hon. Member himself has got it; but I did not think it necessary to put the House to the expense of printing it.

 DR. FARQUHARSON

The right hon. Gentleman has kindly given me the evidence, but it has been given to me in strict confidence. The information on which my remarks were based was derived from other sources.

 DR. CLARK (Caithness)

I think my hon. Friend has been well advised in treating us to this preliminary skirmish, and I trust that when we come to the main battle we shall hear the right hon. Gentleman's views about the Report. I suppose my hon. Friend will move the reduction of the right hon. Gentleman's salary, because the right hon. Gentleman himself is responsible for what has occurred. It seems to me quite plain that the medical officers are unjustly used, inasmuch as they have a longer time of foreign service than military officers, and are obliged to have a greater amount of sick leave. As the result of that you have got no efficiency in the Medical Service; as a result you have the mortality among the medical officers 33 per cent. higher than among other officers, a result, I think, very serious. It arises from not giving these officers the same leave, and from giving them longer foreign service than other officers, and so you are killing off your medical officers at the rate of a third more than others. Surely it is time this loss of life should cease. With the other matter to which I wish to allude, there is no doubt sentiment associated, though it is not that entirely. The right  hon. Gentleman has abolished relative rank and has degraded the position of medical officers in the Army. This is not merely a sentimental grievance, because when you abolish relative rank you abolish certain privileges and advantages that attended that rank in quarters. Perhaps if we give him sufficient evidence the right hon. Gentleman may be induced to change his mind if it is desired, and that medical officers do desire it is unquestioned. In the Departmental Committee of eight there were five of them in favour of granting the rank, only one medical expert being on the other side with

PART SEVEN TO FOLLOW

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #63 on: June 28, 2017, 05:12:18 PM »
PART SEVEN AND FINAL PART ;D

VOLUNTEER EQUIPMENTS.

HC Deb 13 March 1890 vol 342 cc727-64 727

the hon. Member for North Islington (Mr. Bartley), and a gallant Admiral. If there is no such desire in the Navy that is no reason why it should not exist in the Army. I hope we shall be able to get something more satisfactory from the right hon. Gentleman. We have got this Committee, and witnesses have proved to the hilt all the statements of my hon. Friend; the Committee have reported in our favour, and still the right hon. Gentleman persists in his course. We shall want good reasons why he does this. You will not get the same class of men as heretofore; you will have the Service boycotted by the profession; you will only get the riff-raff of the profession to enter the Army Medical Service. I trust the right hon. Gentleman may be induced to re-consider his position and not persist in defiance of the feeling of the profession.
 
 MAJOR RASCH (Essex, S.E.)

I am well aware that discussion at this moment is deprecated by the Front Bench; and I will occupy only a few moments on a subject to which I would direct the right hon. Gentleman's attention, and perhaps he will give some reply when the particular Vote comes on in Committee. I refer to the rations allowed to the private soldier. On joining the Service the recruit is informed that his rations will be provided free, but he soon discovers that his free rations are limited to one pound of bread and three-quarters of a pound— which is, practically, half a pound—of meat a day. Now, the work of a private soldier in a cavalry regiment is severe. He is up at half-past 5 in the morning, and with stable work, dull gymnasium, and school, there is an amount of work for which the rations supplied are quite insufficient. It may be as I have asid, heard it said before, that the rations a soldier gets are more than, as a rule, the agricultural labourer gets; and to a certain extent that is true, but the agricultural labourers gets quantity if he does not get quality. Bacon and. broad, it may be said, he gets to any quantity he requires. But the soldier does not get sufficient for the work lie has to do.

A recruit in good working condition, by the time he has had his breakfast and his dinner, has got through his rations, and so has nothing to eat from 2 o'clock in the day until 7.30 the next morning. The result is, he goes to the canteen and fills himself with indifferent beer; presently he gets drunk, is put into the guard-room, and returned inefficient for a certain number of days. I commend this to the notice of hon. Gentlemen opposite anxious to encourage temperance—that the best way to decrease drinking among the soldiers is to feed them better, and, in the end, you will find it cheaper. You have now, while you half starve a soldier, to offer every inducement to recruits in the way of bounty, pay, and pensions; but make the men more comfortable, and you will find tin; aggregate cost will be less. I am the more tempted to bring this matter under the notice of the right hon. Gentleman, because since he has been in office the right hon. Gentleman has done his best to improve the position and to add to the comfort of the private soldier.

 MR. MAC NEILL (Donegal, S.)

Perhaps I may offer the hon. and gallant Gentleman a statement of a Minister that has some bearing on the point lie has raised. The British soldier is underfed, according to the hon. and gallant Gentleman, and may be that is so, for I may remind him that it is considered necessary to increase his rations when he is engaged in battering down the houses of the Irish tenantry.

Here is a question that was put to the Secretary for War by the Tory Member for East Antrim (Captain M'Calmont) on May 17 last year, whether he (the Secretary for War) would be prepared to sanction the granting of special allowances to the troops employed for months in aid of the Civil Power in the County of Donegal. This is the answer of the Financial Secretary—  The troops in question have had an additional meat ration. No further special allowance is contemplated. It seems, therefore, that the claim to additional rations is admitted when the troops are engaged upon the duty of stirring up civil strife. But I will defer more specific remarks upon this point until we reach the Vote in Committee. What I now wish to do is to turn attention to the position and status of Army Chaplains, and though, through being away, I have not been able to give notice of my intention, the right hon. Gentleman opposite will have had some intimation that the matter would be raised from the questions I have on previous occasions addressed to him. I have pointed out how a great diminution of expenditure would be effected by giving to the parochial clergy, both here and in Ireland, some small addition to their incomes if they undertake the spiritual care of soldiers in their parish. If he has studied the question the right hon.

 Gentleman will recollect that Army Chaplains for home camps and garrisons are comparatively a new invention. The institution of Army Chaplains was for the purpose of providing for soldiers going abroad that spiritual advice which otherwise they might be unable to have. But the system has been developed, and we now have Army Chaplains at home. I believe there are 88 Army Chaplaincies on the Estimates now; and my suggestion is that these Army Chaplains should— having regard, of course, to vested interest?—be superseded by parochial clergy wherever the latter are ready and willing to do duty. By this means you will effect an enormous saving in expenditure under this head. Moreover, as I am informed by officers, and I can well understand that it should be so, soldiers will derive more advantage from the ministrations of the local clergy than from the official Chaplains, who have, more or less, the status of officers, and between whom and the men there cannot be that easy, respectful familiarity which should exist between a pastor and his flock. I speak in the interest of a body of men with whom personally, perhaps, I have little favour, but whom I respect and esteem —the Irish Protestant, clergy.

The right hon. Gentleman will I remember that, as regards the Catholic clergy, the Bishops declined to entertain the idea. On a former occasion the right hon. Gentleman said that if I could show him that, in my view, I had the approval of the heads of the Established Church he would consider whether he could not make this arrangement for Army Chaplaincies at, of course, a reduced expenditure, availing himself of the services of the parochial clergy of the Church of Ireland. I am now happy to tell him that, having met the Archbishop of Dublin, his Grace, in the course of conversation, said that he also had had his attention directed to this subject and that he cordially approved of the proposal. His Grace is, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, a temporal Peer, and he said he would do his best by his influence in another place to facilitate any efforts here. Without going into particulars, I may state that out of those 88 chaplaincies I have mentioned, and which entail an expenditure of £57,000 a year, there are eight in Ireland costing £9,500 a year. They have large pay and retiring allowances. The Irish clergy now in possession of cures would do the work of these chaplains, and consider themselves well paid for £2,000 a year. It happens that all the stations to which these eight chaplains are appointed are in the diocese of Dublin, and under the jurisdiction of the Prelate whose sanction I have referred to.

Of all persons in Ireland the clergy, who are supporters of the present Administration, least deserve to suffer under any sense of wrong from the action of the present Government. It is strange that they should find an advocate in a political opponent like myself; but I have the greater pleasure in supporting their case, because the two Members who may be considered as specially representatives of their interests —the two Members for Dublin University, —owing to their position on the Treasury Bench, are debarred from taking action. It is a question of long standing. It was brought before the present Attorney General for Ireland by his constituents in the University, and it was threatened that if he would not give a pledge to look after the interests of the Protestant clergy they would start a candidate of their own against the Government candidate. On July 2, 1887, a letter was addressed to the present Attorney General for Ireland by one of his constituents, in which it was remarked that up to that time their Representative had done nothing for the Irish clergy who elected him— too busy, I suppose, in preparing legal answers for his chief—and that this would be a proper subject for comment at the next Election. On the same day the right hon. Gentleman replied, saying he would give immediate attention to the questions referred to if elected; and, though he could not hope to have much influence, such as he had should be exercised. Has he exercised any influence? Is it not a deplorable position for the Irish clergy when they have to accept aid, willingly given, from a political opponent? I certainly think Trinity College, Dublin, has a strong claim upon the Government. They should recollect that two-thirds of the electorate are members of the Irish Church, and that they provide a ready means by which the Government are supplied with a constant succession of Law Officers in this House. I may ask, I think, for the redemption of the pledge, that if I can show the consent and approval of the heads of the Church, my proposition should be favour ably considered. I have that approval. I can show that there would be a saving of some £6,000 a year, that a material benefit would be conferred on the clergy, and that the change would be in accordance with a strong feeling in the Army.
 
 MR. W. H. SMITH

My right hon. Friend cannot respond now, he having exhausted his right to speak, but he will refer to this question when the Vote is reached in Committee.

 Question put, and agreed to.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

THE END  ;)

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #64 on: June 28, 2017, 05:13:11 PM »
THE MANCHESTER REGIMENT AT TIPPERARY.

HC Deb 13 February 1891 vol 350 cc607-8 607

 MR. JOHN O'CONNOR (Tipperary, S.)

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the colonel commanding the 1st Manchester Regiment, stationed in Tipperary, issued orders to the men of the regiment that they were not to partake of any refreshment in the house of John A. Carew, grocer and spirit merchant of that town; that on the 4th inst. two soldiers, having entered the premises of Mr. Carew. they were placed under arrest, stripped of their belts, and put under charge of the picket, but subsequently released because of their ignorance of the Regimental Order; whether any charge of misconduct has ever been brought against Mr. Carew in the management of his house; and what is the reason for Mr. Carew's house being forbidden by the Military Authorities?

 MR. E. STANHOPE

The officer commanding the 1st Battalion Manchester Regiment did forbid his men to enter the house of J. A. Carew; but it is not the fact that two men were arrested on the 4th inst. for disobeying the Order.

 MR. J. O'CONNOR

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered the questions in the third and fourth paragraphs. Is he aware that during the past two years men have in Tipperary been sent to prison nearly every week for what is known as boycotting there?

 MR. E. STANHOPE

I am not aware of that fact. As to the questions contained in the third and fourth paragraphs, if the hon. Member will give me time I will try and get the information asked for. All I know at present is that 608 the colonel decided, after full consideration with the Local Authorities, to take this step; but I do not know the reason.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #65 on: June 28, 2017, 05:13:54 PM »
UPDATE TO THE ONE ABOVE.

THE 1ST MANCHESTER REGIMENT.

HC Deb 19 February 1891 vol 350 cc1076-8 1076

 MR. JOHN O'CONNOR (Tipperary, S.)

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the War Department whether he is aware that the Colonel commanding the 1st Manchester Regiment, stationed in 1077 Tipperary, issued orders to the men of the regiment that they were not to partake of any refreshment in the house of John A. Carew, grocer and spirit merchant of that town; that on the 4th instant, two soldiers, having entered the premises of Mr. Carew, they were placed under arrest, stripped of their belts, and put under charge of the picket, but subsequently released because of their ignorance of the Regimental Orders; whether any charge of misconduct has ever been brought against Mr. Carew in the management of his house; and what is the reason for Mr. Carew's house being forbidden by the Military Authorities?

 COLONEL WARING (Down, N.)

May I ask whether the Order issued by the Commanding Officer in question is not strictly within his power, and whether it would be conducive to good order and discipline to interfere with his discretion in such matters?

 MR. E. STANHOPE

As I have already stated, the Commanding Officer of the 1st Manchester Regiment did forbid his men to resort to the house of Mr. J. A. Carew in Tipperary; but I am informed that the soldiers were not arrested under the circumstances alleged in the question. In reply to the question of the hon. and gallant Member (Colonel Waring), it is within the province of any Commanding Officer to forbid any soldier from visiting any particular house in the locality if their so doing would, in his opinion, be injurious to discipline. The officer in command of the Manchester Regiment has simply exercised this power.

 MR. J. O'CONNOR

Would it not be fair for the right hon. Gentleman to give me and the House some information as to the reason why this house was forbidden to the Manchester Regiment? Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider it rather a slur upon Mr. Carew as to the management of his house? Mr. Carew desires, through me, to say that he challenges any investigation with regard to his conduct. I want to know also whether the two men in question were not put under arrest by Sergeant O'Brien, and whether the right hon. Gentleman will receive affidavits or statements made by several men who were present, and who witnessed the two men being placed under arrest?
 
 MR. E. STANHOPE

I decline altogether to go beyond the discretion of the commanding officer. That discretion was vested in him. If the hon. Member thinks it worth while to send me affidavits I will look into them. I believe the commanding officer exercised his discretion in the matter.


© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #66 on: June 28, 2017, 05:14:23 PM »
MEDICAL GRADING.

HC Deb 04 July 1918 vol 107 cc1867-8W 1867W

 Mr. SNOWDEN
 
asked the Undersecretary of State for War if he will have immediate attention given to the way in which the men of the 6th Manchester Regiment, Cowshott Camp, Brookwood, Surrey, recently transferred from the East Lancashire Regiment, and who are B2 and B3 men, are being passed by the medical officer, the men being simply marched past the medical officer in fours and passed then as fit; and will he see that all these men are given a thorough examination before being graded?

 Mr. MACPHERSON

As I informed my hon. Friend the Member for Burnley on Tuesday last, I am making inquiries into1868W this matter. I regret that these inquiries are not yet complete, but I will write to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

 Mr. JOWETT

asked the Minister of National Service how many appeals have been made on the ground of wrong grading as to medical fitness for military service at the West Hiding of Yorkshire Appeal Court; and how many of such appeals have been granted?

 Mr. BECK
 
The necessary information regarding the West Riding Appeal Tribunal is not available, but the following are the figures in respect of all Appeal Tribunals in the Yorkshire Region during the period 9th March, 1918 to. 29th June, 1918, inclusive: Number of applications made to an Appeal Tribunal in the Yorkshire Region for re-examination by the medical assessors, 1,472, of which 252 cases have not yet been heard. Number of appeals allowed, 283. It is not known in how many of these "appeals allowed" the medical assessors have altered the grading.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #67 on: June 28, 2017, 05:14:50 PM »
ARMY FOOD SUPPLIES.

HC Deb 13 May 1915 vol 71 cc1817-8 1817

 Mr. HODGE

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that complaints are reaching the parents of soldiers of one of the Manchester regiments in training at Grantham as to the quality and lack of quantity of food supplies; and can he state whether the supply of food is in the hands of a contractor?

Mr. BAKER

I understand that information to this effect has been received from 1818 a newspaper; the General Officer Commanding, however, reports that he has received no complaints and that the supply services at the camp are well administered. The supply is not in the hands of a contractor. The food is of the best quality and is supplied from Government store

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #68 on: June 28, 2017, 05:15:28 PM »
VOLUNTEERS (PROFICIENCY PAY).

HC Deb 28 June 1915 vol 72 c1475W 1475W

 Mr. NEEDHAM
asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether his attention had been drawn to the fact that forty-seven soldiers in the 8th Manchester Regiment who served in the Volunteer Force for many years are denied the proficiency pay of 3d. a day; and whether he will reconsider the decision under which their service in the Volunteer Force is regarded as not qualifying for proficiency pay?

 Mr. FORSTER

There is nothing exceptional in this case. Under existing regulations service in the Volunteers does not qualify for proficiency pay. The question whether it should be allowed to do so is being considered afresh, but the hon. Member must not take this as holding out any great hope of a change.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #69 on: June 28, 2017, 05:15:59 PM »
MANCHESTER REGIMENT (PRIVATE A. W. WHITTAKER).

HC Deb 03 June 1919 vol 116 cc1804-5 1804

 Lieut.-Colonel DALRYMPLE-WHITE

asked the Secretary of State for War if the presumed death in action of Private Arnold D. Whittaker, No. 250927, l/6th Manchester Regiment, who was reported as wounded and missing on 25th March, 1918, cannot" now be officially con-firmed; whether he is aware that this man's father has repeatedly written to the War Office on the subject without receiving a reply; and what is the cause of the delay in this case and similar cases?

Mr. CHURCHILL

I am informed that Private Whittaker was reported wounded and missing on 25th March, 1918, but death has not been presumed officially owing to certain evidence having been submitted showing that he was killed. This evidence, which has been under examination, has now been verified. The death of the man is accordingly being accepted, and the next-of-kin will in due course receive the usual formal notice. The delay in notifying Private Whittaker's father is regretted. It was due, I understand, to the receipt of a large mass of information giving details as to the fate of many soldiers, and all of this required careful examination and consequent investigation.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #70 on: June 28, 2017, 05:17:04 PM »
1ST BATTALION MANCHESTER REGIMENT (PAY).

HC Deb 17 March 1919 vol 113 c1750W 1750W
 
 Major HURST

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will inquire if the men of the 1st Battalion Manchester Regiment, Palestine, received any pay during the seven weeks expiring 26th February, 1919;and whether, if no pay was received by them in that period, he will direct that the men in question are paid more frequently in future?

 Mr. CHURCHILL

Inquiries are being made, and I will let my hon. and gallant Friend know the result.


© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #71 on: June 28, 2017, 05:18:30 PM »
ALTCAR CAMP (FOOD AND SLEEPING ACCOMMODATION).

HC Deb 18 May 1916 vol 82 cc1649-50 1649 1650

 Sir F. CAWLEY

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether he is aware that the troops at the Altcar camp are complaining of both the quality and quantity of the food supplied to them, also that the sleeping accommodation is quite inadequate; and will he state how many deaths have taken place at this camp in the Reserved Manchester Regiment since they left Southport on 19th April, and the cause of the same?

 Mr. TENNANT

I have made careful inquiry and I find that no complaints about food or about accommodation at this camp have been received. One death, the cause of which was heart failure, occurred in the 13th Reserve Battalion South Lancashire Regiment after it left Southport for Altcar, but no deaths have taken place in the Manchester battalion.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #72 on: June 28, 2017, 05:19:01 PM »
INOCULATION AGAINST DISEASE.

HC Deb 04 February 1915 vol 69 cc139-40 139

 Sir HAROLD ELVERSTON

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Colonel Davies-Colley, of the 6th Reserve Manchester Regiment, recently issued instructions that all the men in the regiment must be inoculated against typhoid, and that if any objected force must be used to carry out the instruction; that on the 21st or 22nd January six men, who refused to be inoculated, were brought before Colonel Davies-Colley, who sent them to the doctor under escort; and that whilst an attempt was being made to forcibly inoculate one man Four others escaped and interviewed the brigade officer; whether proper official notice has been taken of the action of Colonel Davies-Colley; and what steps will be taken to prevent further improper instructions being issued by this officer?
 
 Mr. TENNANT
 
No, Sir. My attention has not been drawn to this case and no action has been taken with regard to it by the War Office. If any incorrect instructions have been issued, I have no doubt that the general officer commanding would take suitable notice.

 Mr. LAURENCE HARDY
 
asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware of the campaign which is in existence for the purpose of discouraging our soldiers in the New Armies from being inoculated against enteric and other similar diseases; whether, in view of the statistics in support of inoculation, as shown during the present War, measures will be at once taken against any organisation which carries on such an agitation; and whether he will consider if the time has now come when inoculation should be made compulsory for all soldiers proceeding to the front on active service, both for their own sakes and those with whom they are in contact?

 Mr. PETO

asked whether inoculation against typhoid fever and vaccination against small-pox will, in future, be compulsory for all ranks in the military forces of the Crown before they are sent on service oversea during the currency of the present War?

 Mr. TENNANT
 
The answer to the first point is in the affirmative, and to the second that it is not proposed to take any action against the organisations referred to. As regards compulsion, I am advised that legislation would be necessary. The introduction of a Bill is not at present contemplated, though this may be further considered should necessity arise.
 
Mr. CHANCELLOR

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the introduction of such a Bill now would be a breach of contract with the recruits who have joined the Army, and would involve deep dishonour?

 Mr. TENNANT

I do not agree with that.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #73 on: June 28, 2017, 05:19:50 PM »
OBSERVATIONS.

HC Deb 09 August 1859 vol 155 cc1274-5 1274

 MR. JOHN LOCKE
 
said, he rose to call the attention of the House to the case of enlistment, in Her Majesty's 96th Regiment of Foot, of the late Private James Caulfield, who, when under 15 years of age, was enlisted in that regiment at Westminster, on the 23rd of September, 1857; and, his discharge having been refused, he died from the rigours of discipline, at Park-hurst Hospital on the 21st of July, 1858.

But for the lateness of the Session, he would have asked for a Select Committee. 1275 He was induced to take up the matter in consequence of the petition of John Caulfield, the father of the deceased, and the representations of several respectable individuals, who took au interest in the matter, and certainly it did furnish an instance to show the necessity of keeping a watchful eye over the system employed for recruiting the army. It appeared that the deceased James Caulfield, being under 15 years of age, had been enlisted by a Sergeant Thomas.

 MR. SPEAKER

said, he must remind the hon. Member that he could not make a statement unless he intended to conclude with a Motion.

 MR. JOHN LOCKE

said, he would then conclude by moving for a Select Committee. The petitioner complained that his son, being under 15 years of age, had been enlisted by Sergeant Thomas for the 96th Regiment of Foot, the latter making to the magistrate a representation that the youth was 18 years of age, under which age his enlistment would have been illegal. The mother was subsequently prevented by Sergeant Thomas from proving her son's real age, and Sergeant Thomas was also accused of having represented to the boy that he would have 1s. 3d. a day and free rations.

Young Caulfield was sent to the regiment in the Isle of Wight, where the labour of a private soldier proved too much for his tender age. He fell ill and a representation having been made of his condition by a private in the regiment to the lad's father, the latter applied for his discharge, but was put off on various grounds, and in the meantime the boy, who had been removed to Parkhurst, died from the effect of the toil and labour to which he had been exposed.
 
 Notice taken, that Forty Members were not present: House counted; and Forty Members not being present,
 
 House was adjourned at a quarter before Seven o'clock.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #74 on: June 28, 2017, 05:21:14 PM »
Bonus week ;D

2ND MANCHESTER REGIMENT (LANCE-CORPORAL W. MOORE).

HC Deb 10 December 1920 vol 135 c2621W 2621W

 Mr. ALLEN PARKINSON

asked the Minister of Pensions if he is aware that the parents of Lance-Corporal William Moore, No. 89029, 2nd Manchesters, who was reported missing on 24th July, 1920. while serving in Mesopotamia, have no yet received any further information con firming his death or otherwise; whether he is aware that the separation allowance was reduced to 7s. 6d. per week on 5th October, 1920; and if, in view of the fact that both his father and mother are invalids with five children dependent upon them for support, he will have the case reviewed and, if possible, a larger pension awarded?

 Major TRYON

I regret that I have not yet been able to ascertain all the facts in this case, but I hope to be in a position to write fully to my hon. Friend at an early date.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

Up date from Mack 28/Jun/2017

hiya neil
89029 was his WW1 number before they issued the 7 digit numbers,his new number was 3513734 William moore,killed on 24th july

he lived at 78 new fold wigan

mack ;D
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 07:19:35 PM by timberman »