Pro THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR:1
Sin,—The Bill of 1871 for the abolition of Army purchase provided for compensating officers for the over-Regulation as well as the Regulation prices of their commissions. On the Motion for its second reading in the House of Lords an amendment was proposed by the Duke of Richmond which was carried. But the House adjourned without disposing of the Motion for the second reading. Ministers thereupon advised the Crown to issue a Warrant for the abolition of purchase ; and Lord Granville persuaded the Lords "to do fall justice" to tee officers by proceeding with and passing the Army Purchase Bill. I thought thirty-four years ago, as I think now, that Lord Granville's speeches and attitude on that occasion were admirable examples of his infinite tact in inducing the Lords "to accept measures they disapproved." And I consequently referred to them in this sense in a sentence, perhaps insufficiently explicit, but Which was not, I submit, inaccurate. Mr. Ralph in your last issue has challenged the accuracy of this statement, and from your editorial chair you have stated that "the facts are, of course, as stated by our correspondent." When an editor regrets his "inadvertence," it bar lly becomes a reviewer to remain impenitent. But the fata.s are not as stated by your corre- spondent. The Royal Warrant no doubt supplied the motive- power. But in consequence, and with the help of Lord Granville's tact, the Army Purchase Act did pass the House of Lords. Mr. Ralph will find it in the Statute Book as the 34 & 35 Viet., c. 86.—I am, Sir, &c.,
YOUR REVIEWER.
Previous page
