[77] See Commission on the Administration of the Naval and Military Departments, February 1890, pp. 57, 67, 70, 73, and 114.
[78] The gymnasium.
[79] I once knew a gentleman of far higher rank than a War Office messenger who laboured under the same defect. We were at one time interested in an association which, though useful, constantly met with opposition. Coming across him one day after a meeting which he had attended, I inquired how matters were going on, and he replied, 'I was determined there should be no 'itch, so I brought them up to the scratch.'
[CHAPTER XXIII]
Among the numerous measures carried out by the late Lord Cardwell during the period of his administration of the War Department, none has exercised a wider or more beneficial influence than the introduction of short service and reserve for the non-commissioned officers and men of the army. Indeed, when we consider the results achieved, it seems rather surprising that such a change had not been made long ago, not only in the interests of the men, but also in the reserve of strength which it gives to the country in the event of war.
In considering the subject in its various bearings, both military and financial, it will be desirable to refer shortly to the methods by which we had endeavoured to maintain our forces in former days. During the great wars in which this country was engaged at the end of the last and in the earlier years of the present century, although the arrangements for recruiting occasionally varied, the main principle adopted was one of long service with high bounties on enlistment, and small pensions on retirement. Yet, so difficult was it found to keep the ranks complete, that debtors and even criminals were pardoned on condition of serving abroad.[80] The cost was enormous. For instance, in 1808 the levy and bounty money alone exceeded 40l. for each man, before he had been trained or had done a day's service. This was not only wasteful, but led to drunkenness and desertion[81]; and, notwithstanding its cost, the plan failed in providing sufficient recruits, and the army at critical moments was lamentably behind the numbers required. For instance, early in the Peninsular war it was about 43,000[82] short of the desired establishment, and during the Crimean war the deficiency was over 46,000.[83]
The real fact was that the system of recruiting up to 1870 was, and always had been, unpopular. The service was a very hard one. Regiments were kept abroad for upwards of twenty years, often in tropical, unhealthy climates; and of the thousands who enlisted yearly but few ever returned, and even those were often prematurely aged and broken down. It is no wonder that the poor people of the country looked upon enlistment of their sons with dread, and as almost equivalent to a sentence of banishment and of death. So great was the difficulty, that between 1861 and 1869—although the men were then better paid, fed, and clothed than in former years—the average number of recruits obtained was only 12,546 per annum.[84] In 1867 General Peel, the Minister for War, said that 'the question now is whether the British army should be allowed to collapse.' In that year another Royal Commission was appointed to consider the subject, and in their report said: 'The military history of this country, even up to the date of the last great war in which we were engaged, shows that it has been our practice during periods of peace to reduce our military establishments to the lowest possible point.... No preparations for a state of war were thought of; and the consequence has been that, when war occurred, everything had to be done in a hurry at the most lavish expense.... Men were enrolled and sent half-trained into the field, material manufactured, transport provided, and accommodation for the sick and wounded devised and organised.' They went on to say that 'wars will be sudden in their commencement and short in their duration, and woe to that country which is unprepared to defend itself.'
The above remarks will probably be sufficient to demonstrate the difficulty which the country had experienced over and over again, not only in maintaining its forces in the field during a campaign, but even in providing sufficient numbers for our garrisons at home and abroad in time of peace. But whatever may have been the merits or shortcomings of the arrangements up to 1870, one point, at all events, was perfectly clear—that the army had no reserve. One or two feeble efforts in that direction had been made, but had failed. When a great war came upon us, the only resource was to try and stimulate recruiting by lowering the physical standard and by raising the bounties, so that often the campaign was over before the desired numbers had been obtained.[85]
The time, indeed, had fully come for a change of system. In March 1869, Mr. Cardwell, speaking in the House of Commons, indicated his intention of abolishing the plan of long enlistments, and the following year introduced the bill affirming the principle of short service and reserve. What he said was 'that in time of peace the army would feed the reserve, and in time of war the reserve would feed the army.' Having confidence in the scheme, he boldly abolished the old costly system of bounty on enlistment. The principle, when first established, was tentative and optional, and naturally required time before a correct opinion could be formed of its progress; indeed, it is only within the last few years that the reserve has developed to its normal figure. The change was much criticised at the time, and it was confidently asserted that men would not care to engage for a short period; and that even were they to do so, the reserves would not be forthcoming if called out. No sooner, however, had the system been adopted than its success year by year became apparent. Not only did the numbers enlisting largely increase, but the proportion of those selecting long service rapidly declined. Then again, although the formation of a reserve was necessarily gradual, we have had two proofs of its reliable nature; the men composing it having been called out, first in 1878 under apprehension of war, and again partially in 1882 during the Egyptian campaign; and in both cases the percentage of absentees was very small. I have already mentioned that during the last years of the long service system the average annual number of recruits was only 12,546, whereas in 1892 no less than 41,659 men joined the army, and the reserve had in January 1894 reached the large figure of 80,349. Before leaving the subject of reserves, it will be as well to mention that Lord Cardwell, in 1870, also gave effect to the Militia Act of 1867, by which a certain number of men of that force, on receiving a small annual bounty, engage to join the regular army in case of war. This reserve now amounts to 30,103, in addition to the numbers just quoted.