A LIVING WAGE FOR THE ARMY.

Dunstan Times, Issue 2678, 11 August 1913, Page 8

A LIVING WAGE FOR THE ARMY.

(By an Army Officer.) For 108 years, aa pointed out by th® War Secretary himself, the meagre rates of pay received by the British officer have remained unaltered. In the year of grace 1913, therefor©, * generous Government announces itself determined to remedy sudh an injustice. With febrile impatience the War Office sots about “putting matters right," and accordingly defers bringing into effect its farcical “increase" until January Ist, 19141—the usual day for financial changes is the first day ot the financial y©ax, fcli&ti is to say April Ist, but it really would have been rubbing it in a little too much to make a start on All Fools’ Day! It would be difficult to find anything more illogical and ill-considered than this alleged increase of pay. The present pay of a second lieutenant on joining is 5s 3d, and on tins sum it is absolutely impossible for an officei to live in any branch of the Array. How has Colonel Seely met the case? Not by giving tho second lieutenant more pa\. Oh dear, no 1 He has merely put a second star on his sleeve and called him lieutenant; but his pay remains at '6s 3d per day. Not content with this mockery, tho War Office has hulled another'misfortuno at tho second lieutenant by promising him an additional Is 3d per day after throe years service. It will be seen that this is a blow and not a benefit when it is pointed out that the pay of a lieutenant has always been 6a 6d per day, and that at the present moment, out of a total of 1410 second lieutenants who are serving to-day, there are only 84 in the whole Army who have three or more years’ service. This means that under tho present conditions 94 per cent, of tho second lieutenants obtain their promotion and the rise ot Is 3d per day which it carries with it in lees than three years. The effect of Colonel Seely s increase’ is therefore to spoil the chances of an early rise of pay for 94 per rent, of the junior officers of the Array, Ibe inconsiderate treatment meted out to these juniors is glaringly shown up by cha invidious distinction which is made between vonng officers obtaining then* commissions through the more usual channels and those promoted from the ranks. Tho War .Secretary provides that the latter shall receive nob only £l5O wherewith to defray tho expenses of their original outfit, but also a grant of £SO por annum for three years m addition to their 5a 3d per day Tho question which naturally presente itself is what is this £SO per annum for? Is it granted in recognition of the fact that tho hare pay of a subaltern on joining is insufficient to enable him to live? If so, why is it issued m the one case and not m the other? The expenses of the man proi rated from the ranks and of the cadet gazetted from Sandhurst are absolutely identical. Why, then, the distinction? Ni one grudges the man from the ran .*9 his reward. If it is sought to democratise tho Army by all moans let it be democratised; hut for Heaven s sake do not let two officers with equal claims serve shoulder to shoulder on unequal terms! Tho next benefit conferred, according to Colonel Seely’s announcement, is Must after six years’ service an increase of 2s 6d per day is to bo given to all lieutenants. This undoubtedly affects favorably a good number of officers, but not to tho extent stated. Tho pay warrant has for yeans past allowed an extra Is a day, the “charity bob," as it is called, to lieutenants of seven years’ sen-ice and over. The increase in their case, therefore, only amounts to Is 6d a day and not 2s 6d as announced. A further anomaly is revealed in the case of captains. Officers, after three yeaimr’ service in that rank, receive 2s a day in addition to the 11s 7d a day which is their present rate of pay. Majors, on the other hand, are at present paid 13a 7d per day. It will thus ho seen that a captain on the higher scale will receive the same pay ns a major on the lower scolc—a most unfortunate and ill-thought-out arrangement.

Tho final announcement of the War Secretary provides that in tho case of lieutenant-colonels command pay shall henceforth bo os instead of 3s per day; but as in a good many instances this has already been tho case for some time past there is not very much novelty- in it. The whole scheme is wrong—look. Mock, and barrel. What is wanted is a living wage- right through the Army. Not only that, but the wage should bo commensurate with the responsibility of the recipient. It is ridiculous to pay an educated specialist charged with the training, commanding and leading of a company of 100 fighting men a salary whicli would l>o sneered at by a second-rate French cook.

Twenty years ago conditions wore different. In those days men sent their boys into tho Army with their eyes open. They know that private means were a necessary adjunct to the profession. They paid up cheerfully bseauso they knew that by doing so they purchased not only a pleasant, easy life for their sons but also in many cases they secured a sound social position for them. In the ’nineties military science was practically unheard of. a-nd it was almost unknown for an, officer to bo in uniform after lunch. Tho .South African War has changed all that. Nowadays officers have to work, and word hard. If a man wishes to ho tolerated in the .Service he must banish any hopes of being able, in the pursuit of pleasure, to cast aside his uniform every afternoon of his life. ITis day’s work seldom finishes before five o’clock or later. Tho days of idleness and vapidity have vanished for over.

As for social position), commissions hare been distributed broadcast, and Hie officers of tho Army would be the first to admit that the terms officer and gentleman are, alas! not so absolutely synonymous as they were of yore. The social prestige attained by officers depends on their individuality, not on the glamour of their scarlet coat. And vert,, notwithstanding the loss of most of the net advantages whidh were in bygone days the appanage of a military career, officers have received no pecuniary increment to compensate them either for that which has been taken a wav from them or for the extra work which they have been called upon to perform. And now comes this ridiculous sop of the 1113 Estimates. Why d'oes the Secretary of State for War ta.kc two bites at the cherry ? Tho solution nf the whole problem is so simple. There is no question of surmptuarv laws for putting down expenses. Officers must lire andi must keep up their appearance and dignity. As long as messes continue, however economically they may be run. there must be certain expenses which cannot he abolished. What the Army at large expected of the War Secretary was that every officer throughout the Army should receive 4s a. day for his messing if ho ws« one of a mow,, or towards his food if he were living out of mess. In a recent statement Colonel gave the (strength nf the officers in the Army as 571 it Homs and 2005 in the Dominions. Officer* earring in India «re

not paid by the Home Government. Tiio annual oost to the public would, thetrofore only about to £570,000, and, to use Colonel Seely’s own words, “the nation will certainly not grudge it."