The weary Army debate, which seems to grow wearier the
more passionately honourable members insist on the privilege of liberating their souls on the enbject, was resumed on Monday night by Sir John Pakington, who, as Mr. Trevelyan afterwards very justly said, made a speech as much in favour of introducing pur- chase into the Navy as against its extinction for the Army. Sir John, who is usually far from an extreme partizan, called the Government Bill "a costly party project and a sop to democracy," which would not contribute "one iota to the defences of the country." He repeated Lord Elcho's description of the scheme as "one of the most wantonly extravagant and wasteful proposals that have ever been made to Parliament." Yet Sir John is fundamentally candid, and actually told the House himself that though a Commission had recommended the abolition of purchase in the Army above the rank of major, in order that the command of regiments might not be affected by purchase, and though the Government wished and tried to adopt it, they found the purchase system so deeply rooted in the Army that they had to give up the attempt as impracticable! As for 'selection,' he said,
every First Lord of the Admiralty suffers under the necessity of passing by so many officers who deserved a command, and select- ing only one, till they practically drop into promoting by seniority for want of moral courage to select. That is a capital reason for selecting moral courage to preside in the Admiralty and War Office, and for not selecting Sir John Pakington. It does not prove that the country ought to suffer, to spare the feelings of First Lords and War Secretaries.
