These facts are undeniable proofs, not only of the popularity of the present arrangement, but also that the army can at once be largely augmented in case of necessity by men thoroughly trained and in the prime of life. There are, however, other satisfactory elements in the present system. The old feeling that the man who enlisted was virtually lost to his family is becoming a tradition of the past. In former times, as I have said, but few returned, and even they were often prematurely aged by long residence in unhealthy climates; whereas nowadays the men who come back to civil life are, on an average, little over twenty-six years old, and their numbers amount to more than 17,000 per annum, whilst their few years passed in the army have been beneficial in giving them habits of discipline and obedience.

From a financial point of view—which, it is needless to say, is an important feature—the results are equally satisfactory. In the first place, the enormous sums formerly spent in bounties and levy money are now in a great measure saved. Then, again, the pension list is decreasing. Had the old plan continued, with the army at its present strength, the annual cost of pensions would have been nearly 3,000,000l. per annum. It will now gradually decrease to less than one-third of that amount. By an actuarial[86] calculation it is estimated that, taking all charges into consideration, the economy of the present system over the old one will be a saving in the normal of 21·71 per cent. for Great Britain and of 47·2 for India. The above statements are made, not as mere matters of opinion, but as facts founded on official records and parliamentary reports; and afford proofs that whilst military service is more popular, and our strength and elasticity for war considerably greater than formerly, at the same time the annual cost is much less. It may, perhaps, be said that the army estimates are increasing; and my reply is that as the Empire is expanding, it requires not only more men, but more numerous and costly armaments for defence, than in the past.

Even the results just quoted do not conclude the story. Several other incidental advantages arise from the abandonment of long service, which may be shortly alluded to. Many persons, for instance, appear to be under the impression that a large proportion of the men now serving are less efficient in point of age than formerly, but the evidence points the other way.

The following are the ages of the non-commissioned officers and men serving in January 1871 and 1894 respectively.[87]

Proportion per 1,000 men

Year Under 20 Between 20 & 30 Over 30 Total
1871 190 490 320 1,000
1894 170 742 88 1,000

The above figures are somewhat remarkable, as showing that the number of men of the most serviceable ages (that is, between 20 and 30) has largely increased since the introduction of short service; and I believe that experienced officers will concur with me that the army of 1894 is, in respect of age, superior to that of former days.

Then, again, in the consideration of the foreign duties which devolve on our forces, it is often urged that long service, at all events, is best adapted to meet Indian requirements, on the two grounds that young soldiers cannot stand tropical climates and that frequent reliefs are costly. Neither of these views will bear the test of examination. The report of the sanitary condition of the army in India said that 'upon the whole, early entry into India appears to be an advantage, not only at first, but in after life.'[88] At a subsequent period, Sir Ranald Martin stated that 'all statistical observations go to disprove anything like acclimatisation in the East Indies.' On the contrary, he declares that 'disease and death increase with length of service and age.' Dr. Brydon also said: 'The death-rate of 1871 shows that the death-rate for the men above thirty has been consistently double that of men below that age.'

Lord Airey's Commission of 1880[89] quoted figures proving that the proportion of deaths, and of invalids sent home, increases in a rapid ratio with age. For instance, the number of deaths and invalids per 1,000 men on the average of ten years is—

Deaths Invalids
Under 25 years old 16·06 25·84
Over 35 and under 40 33·71 76·11